-
The One Good Thing About Tesla
June 7, 2013 | 19 comments
-
The Golden Years
March 21, 2013 | 39 comments
-
Diesel Dilemmas
March 8, 2013 | 26 comments
-
Electric Lemon Aid
February 19, 2013 | 113 comments
-
The New Dart, in Light of the Old
January 11, 2013 | 48 comments
Car Guy
Eyeball to License Plate
Should police be scanning five thousand license plates an hour?
Soon, cops may not even have to pull you over to know almost everything about you — and keep it on file, too.
Motorola — manufacturer of radio equipment and other cop stuff — has developed automated license plate scanners that can ID you (and note your exact location at that moment) at the blink of an electronic eye. Fitted to a cop car, the plate scanners eyeball every passing vehicle, using the license plate number to cross-reference electronic records for such things as outstanding warrants, stolen vehicle reports — potentially, anything that can be tied via the license plate number to a vehicle and thus, to its registered owner.
Motorola says its readers can scan 5,000 plates during the typical eight-hour police shift. That’s just one car, mind you. If every cop car in a given jurisdiction had the scanners, an electronic dragnet would make it very easy to scan almost every vehicle not locked up in a walled private garage.
So is it a good thing — or a bad thing?
There’s no denying the technology would make it a lot easier to identify stolen cars, say — and presumably cuff and stuff the thieves, too.
But the technology has a Dark Side, too.
For one, scanning random vehicles amounts to yet another diminishment of whatever’s left of the Fourth Amendment’s guarantees against warrantless (and unreasonable) searches. If the scanners become ubiquitous you may expect to be ubiquitously scanned, anywhere, anytime — for literally no reason whatsoever other than you happen to be outside of your home.
Civil libertarians note that the scanners do not merely passively search for specific vehicles (plates) that are tied to, say, an outstanding warrant. They monitor and record all vehicles. They also jot down (electronically) the date, time and location your vehicle (and thus, you) were scanned into the system. Which is both creepy and raises a legal issue — maybe several of them. Will an estranged spouse be able to deploy such records in a divorce proceeding to establish proof of infidelity? Will the state authorities provide information about your comings and goings to insurance companies, possibly to be used against you — or as the basis for “adjusting” your premium?
The ACLU argues:
[License plate readers] raise serious concerns to your privacy because of the system’s ability to monitor and track the movements of all vehicles, including those registered to people who are not suspected of any crime. Without restrictions, law enforcement agencies can and do store the data gathered by the license plate readers forever, allowing them to monitor where you have been and when you traveled there over an extended period of time. In fact, a key selling point for vendors is the system’s ability to track drivers. [Emphasis added.]
Of course, cell phones already do much the same thing — but there is an important difference: The cops still have to get a court order to obtain the information obtained and stored by cell phone providers. With plate readers, even that flimsy protection would evaporate.
Indeed, Motorola touts (in its product literature) something called — fittingly enough — BOSS, or Back Office Systems Software. What does BOSS do? Just what you’d expect a BOSS to do, of course:
[Plate readers] can generate vast amounts of data: database, GPS coordinates, time of day, photographs, plate numbers and more. Back at headquarters, BISS turns this data into useful intelligence… Users can query the data using multiple search parameters including time, date, full or partial plate, location and user. BOSS can also map all locations related to a single plate to track vehicle movements. The BOSS web interface allows data to be easily shared across multiple locations and agencies. {Emphasis added.]
Some will say, well — so what? Isn’t it a good thing that new technologies will make it easier to identify and catch no-goodniks, from parking ticket scofflaws to carjackers?
No doubt. Just as tossing whatever remains of the Fourth Amendment into the shredder — and giving, say, the IRS open-door, unlimited, anytime access to all homes, private correspondence, records, etc., would likewise make it more efficient at catching tax-evaders.
About the Author
Eric Peters is an automotive columnist and author of Automotive Atrocities: The Cars You Love to Hate (Motor Books International) and a new book, Road Hogs.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (46) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Eric Peters
More Articles From Car Guy
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/09/17/eyeball-to-license-plate
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 4:12PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
SC Mike| 9.17.10 @ 7:30AM
I’m all for giving police the tools they need to their job, but this system seems to expand their purview a bit more than necessary. Moreover some departments will likely devote too many resources to exploiting this system’s information just because they have a ready data source, not because there’s a big problem that needs to be solved.
However, such a system will be somewhat less invasive down here in South Carolina: we have only one license plate.
Rust Belt Ronny| 9.17.10 @ 7:57AM
Here in Pennsylvania the tax revenue from the new Casino Industry is being distributed. The city of Wilkes Barre invested it's first $2 million dollars in putting up surveillance cameras on it's streets to watch for traffic infractions. I think the contract to install them was over $400,000.00.
I wonder how much money Motorola is getting from the taxpayers for this great new invention of theirs? And how much do they have to kick back to the elected officials to get them to approve the purchase of this new technology for their police forces?
Roger| 9.17.10 @ 8:08AM
SC Mike, pretty soon you'll have 2 plates my friend, the state will realize that gives them more "power" and suddenly, 2 plates will be all the rage among the ruling class. A 1 plate state will become a quickly shrinking minority until they become extinct.
Tim| 9.17.10 @ 1:06PM
Why not four plates? How 'bout a fifth on the roof for the sateliites to use?
Denver Todd| 9.17.10 @ 9:03AM
Two things:
1. The system doesnt have to mounted on police cars. It can be mounted on any vehicle, or at the side of the road.
2. We already have intersection cameras all over town that record comings and goings of all cars, and nobody seems to mind them, but they should. Nobody knows who operates these cameras. It is a big secret, even though they are everywhere.
Anastasia Mather| 9.17.10 @ 9:21AM
Isn't it interesting that the more we've shoved an omnipresent God to whom we must answer out of our lives, the more our fellow human beings are called upon to monitor our (perceived) transgressions, large and small.
The founding fathers knew that people who adhere to moral and ethical laws because they will be answerable to a higher authority would govern themselves.
Havoc| 9.17.10 @ 9:37AM
This is creepy. I don't like it.
Frank Drackman | 9.17.10 @ 9:40AM
One of my friends is a Cop, says all he does inbetween answering calls is run suspicious looking vehicles plates, he still has to call em in Old School Adam-12 style, but you'd be surprised at all the violent felons/probation violators/etc out drivin around with expired tags, burned out taillights, etc
Bill Roughton| 9.17.10 @ 10:16AM
Automobiles, for quite a long time now, have been constitution-free zones. Privacy has no meaning other than as a juridical tool for advancing approved political goals.
We may all want to wear burkas when we are in public to avoid surveillance by CCTV and take up bicycling or horseback riding as a primary mode of transport.
GavInTucson| 9.18.10 @ 4:19AM
Oh, don't worry. Big Sis is all hot and bothered over iris scanners so the burka will be rendered moot.
Between that and the RFID that'll soon follow, you could roll down the street in a block of solid lead and everyone would still know who you are.
Rich D| 9.18.10 @ 2:42PM
Check your new ATM or credit card - it already has the ability to be read without being inserted in a reader. How long will it be before it is scanned as you walk into a store? BTW, you can request a card without the chip - I took mine back to the bank and yelped.
Petronius| 9.17.10 @ 10:17AM
Between this and those black boxes underneath our vehicles what's a driver to do? Our cops are hired guns; not just for the self serving legal establishment, but also the insurance companies, (seat belt laws), and pressure groups, (MADD etc.). Last month a shave tail rookie cop followed me home from grocery shopping. Just before parking in front of my house I got out of my car and asked her why. She said, "you bought beer." What she meant was, she was hoping I would open one. In the old days a beat cop would sometimes forget about some violations for a tip. Not anymore. Jr. Jane Edgar Hoover wants the bust and she has an agenda beyond bragging in the squad room.. Anytime you talk to a cop who doesn't have gray hair, get a Department Service Number. The officer cannot refuse to tell you this information. It ties them to their records. The number on the badge means nothing. Watching your back is now redundant. Everybody else is.
CalMark| 9.17.10 @ 5:12PM
Sounds like a classic case of police harassment.
She followed you because you MIGHT commit a crime.
In spirit, it is no different than the Gestapo and KGB "monitoring" people in the name of "safety" and "State security."
Petronius| 9.17.10 @ 11:15PM
These are the same ones who did sting shopping at convenience stores for the police as part of their high school apprentice service before going to the police academy. They started as snitches and brown nosers driven by their innate desire to wield the authority they serve, and the belief that the rest of us are criminals in our hearts and minds regardless of how we behave. And they will collar us for any offense no matter what it takes.
Some years back, a few friends in Iowa who belonged to the Society for Creative Anachronism were having a little practice sparing in a public park. When a beat cop came up and told them to stop what they were doing and leave, they asked him what law they were breaking. He told them he didn't like what they were doing. On being told that his displeasure didn't make their activity a crime, he threatened them with arrest. And that's the bottom line with any law enforcement. Those 4 words that dominate our national polity, "I don't like it!" are their law because their commissions and badges confer that power.
Thomas| 9.17.10 @ 11:27AM
Look, scanning license tags is not the issue here. That can be done by a human being with a data link. It is how the information is used that is at issue. A system that that scans, checks and only notifies the officer if there is a notice for the tag [stolen vehicle, wanted felon, child abduction, missing person, etc.] is not very intrusive. If, however, data on every tag that is scanned is recorded, then the intrusion level of government is increased significantly. The technology exists. How it is used is at issue.
Shamus| 9.17.10 @ 11:41AM
There's a lot of variation in the quality of law enforcement agencies. Some are first rate, but others are quite worthless.
Houston Rao| 9.17.10 @ 12:29PM
A simple solution would be that any plate not flagged for any outstanding warrants should be immediately erased from all records.
Tom| 9.17.10 @ 5:47PM
I thought the same thing. Except, do you really trust that will happen all the time everywhere?
John Buergel| 9.17.10 @ 6:00PM
Houston Rao,
Ofcourse, why didn't I think of that. Let's ask them to "promise" that they won't abuse the data. Then we can go back to sleep confident that they are keeping their promise. Certainly this has always worked in the past.
Carrington| 9.17.10 @ 10:08PM
You mean like how handgun purchase records are erased at point of sale?
Eddie| 9.17.10 @ 1:36PM
This system has been in use, even if it was just testing, for about 2 years when I first heard about it. It was being used to scan vehicles in high crime neighborhoods to spot stolen tags or cars or reported tags that were used in crimes. I don't have a problem with police using it since there's not a damned thing we can do about it but I DO worry about idiots like sales people or civilian marketing people getting my info if the technology is allowed to be used in the public sector one day. Maybe that's a stretch but that's what I said about the destruction of our Constitution too and look what's happening!
TW| 9.17.10 @ 3:14PM
To me, the worst part is, honest citizens will be subject to undue harassment for minor offenses, while the real criminals can fool this expensive apparatus with an 89 cent marking pen.
Petronius| 9.17.10 @ 11:21PM
In the UK that is the new national sport. When some people get new license plates, they will alter 1 or 2 characters. And when the speed camera flashes them, some unsuspecting person gets an 75 pound citation in his post, or a congestion or parking violation for central London when neither he nor his vehicle have never been inside the M25.
Appleby| 9.17.10 @ 4:06PM
I don't drive, and my cell phone is 10 years old and does nothing but make and receive calls. How will they track me?
Gav8@cox.net| 9.18.10 @ 4:34AM
By preying on your irresistible urge to post here. :)
Appleby| 9.18.10 @ 8:36AM
Have you ever googled Appleby Mennym? (I am convinced you do not read books, so you will not find about who she is any other way). If they follow that name and have any imagination at all, they will be terrified.
Eric Cartman| 9.19.10 @ 4:17PM
Oh! I was thinking restaurant, not dolls. Good to know.
vman77| 9.17.10 @ 4:52PM
1) Courts have ruled that vehicles, their plates, and the operators of the vehicles have a very low expectation of privacy while on city streets, since vehicles are very heavily regulated by the state, and you need the states permission (license plate and registration), to operate them.
2) These devices are very expensive so don't expect them to be on every car anytime soon.
3) Most police agencies, in medium to big cities, have computers in the car that allow access to all the information these devices can gather, just by entering the plate.
4) All the information connected to the registration of the car is public information and can be obtained by a request to the proper agency, unless the info has been sealed or blocked by court order.
Remember, cops are no better or worse than the population at large, since that's where they come from, just better screened.
Tom| 9.17.10 @ 5:50PM
What computers in cars do not do is keep a tab on where the car has been.
"BOSS can also map all locations related to a single plate to track vehicle movements."
That is both one hell of an investigation tool and damn scarey.
Shirley| 9.18.10 @ 6:35AM
If you have nothing to hide, what is the problem?
Shamus| 9.18.10 @ 7:49PM
Your trust in government is naive. The history of Germany, Russia, or China teaches that government can and will kill you for little or no real reason. If you let government run your life, then don't be surprised if you wind up destitute and enslaved.
John Navratil| 9.19.10 @ 9:39AM
Shirley,
Those words mean tyranny. It has been suggested that we each break, on average, three laws a day. Red-light cameras are designed to enforce a system which has been designed to tolerate human error. Your suggestion requires everyone to be perfect, always. I'm sure you never err, or your comment would be one.
CalMark| 9.17.10 @ 5:09PM
Magnificent rationalization: it's not so bad, folks, really. Just go along, there's nothing we can do about it.
As for the courts, let's not quote them too often. The Kehlo Case concerning Eminent Domain ruled that governments can condemn property, steal it from you for almost nothing, then sell it for big bucks to developers who will also pay big taxes.
The United States was founded on Liberty. That means the government has NO RIGHT to track our whereabouts AT ALL, unless we're convicted criminals under sentence.
The fictional British Barrister, Rumpole, says to a judge in one of his stories, that maybe we should "bang up every man, woman, and child in chokey [prison] on the off-chance" they might commit a crime.
This is the first step down that path.
Brian Mc| 9.17.10 @ 6:54PM
The government is likened to termites. They nibble and nibble away and suddenly, it's time to move...where? I suppose we could tear it down and start all over with the same foundation...The Constitution of the United STATES of America.
Carrington| 9.17.10 @ 10:13PM
IT IS NOT UNREASONABLE FOR THE POLICE TO LOOK AT YOU IN PLAIN SIGHT IN PUBLIC! Or to run your plate number. This is a LICENSE plate issued to your car that says you have paid the road tax for the upcoming year.
It is possible a cheating wife or husband could be caught via this method… So what! There is a marital consequence for cheating, and it often triggers a painful financial lesson… there is a consequence for lying to a “loved one.”
What is wrong with the insurance company knowing how you really drive? As a life long “good” driver, I’m sick of paying higher insurance rates to offset to the scum that drive like hell, often without insurance… I HOPE the new system can instantly cross check for presence of valid liability insurance, that would be COOL! Get the scum off MY street!
Cars with windows in public places are legal to visually look into… It’s not unreasonable to look though a car window in a public place. Hide your crack pipe better!
Of course cell phones are off limits to tracking without a warrant, you DON’T NEED A STATE LICENSE to operate a cell phone…few people are injured by uninsured cell phones each year. Cell phones don’t pose the same dangers to the public as cars. Too bad cell phones can’t send a signal to the police if you were moving faster then 8MPH while connected to a call? That could cut down on stupid drivers who talk and drive!
In summary, police officer’s looking at you in public is not unreasonable. Possessing a system that instantly verifies that you paid the taxes to the state and if your car is legal to drive is not unreasonable. Doing this to thousands of cars per hour is still not unreasonable.
I’ve never been treated by a police officer as a bad guy… Am I the only one?
Yes police can abuse this power… But they wont… like how they wont collect nude photos of your body from airport scanners… Oh snap scratch that
This power could be abused… I hope a unlicensed, uninsured driver plows into your car tomorrow!
Radioman777| 9.17.10 @ 11:23PM
This type of technology has no place in a free society. If a crime is committed, then go solve it, but don't subject the populace to constant surveillance just because it's possible to do so. This rapidly devolves into tyranny.
Yosemeti Sam| 9.18.10 @ 2:14AM
Luddites - UNITE!
LOL.
Nohjnogias| 9.18.10 @ 2:38AM
So, ... if you're off to an illicit rendezvous, I guess you're gonna' want to ride you're bicycle, huh?
Appleby| 9.18.10 @ 8:41AM
That would be YOUR bicycle, actually.
Incidentally, since so many cyclists break the laws with impunity -- one woman was recently killed by a brat who was riding on the sidewalk, when he ran her down and she hit her head -- we are discussing forcing the lawbreakers to license their bikes before they can have them back. Obey the law and you escape the hassle. Since we also had a man here who stole approximately 7,500 bicycles and stored them in rented garages all over town, it might be one way for you to get your bike back, too.
Brubaker| 9.18.10 @ 10:11AM
Setting aside for a moment the hysterical paranoia of Eric Peters, readers would do well to remind themselves that license plates are already visible to any interested party. Although you may not like the idea of databasing information derived from observing those plates, there is absolutely no "search" or invasion of privacy involved. Even the analogy to cell phone records is bogus since those records are not on public display.
John Navratil| 9.19.10 @ 9:44AM
Brubaker,
How would you like it if trackingbrubacker.com listed your comings and goings, where your are, and when? If these are now public record, just how likely is the thief to want to know that you car is now three states away? You have to wish away evil to not see the danger in this kind of database.
Erik Larsen| 9.19.10 @ 1:36AM
yeah, it's creepy, but I'm for it. I remember reading Conservative commentators complaining about the surveillance culture when cameras were first coming in. I believe they were useful for the London Tube bombings and other crimes, ie those that could only be solved in retrospect because of video evidence.
jgo| 9.19.10 @ 8:17AM
Demanding that people have license plates on vehicles was over the line. Demanding that people carry travel permits (driver licenses) was over the line. That's when we should have stopped them. Of course, they painted it all as innocent, helpful, convenient, a way to stop bad guys and never hurt innocent people, but it's always been about revenue enhancement and power. Any cop will tell you they can come up wth a pretext to arrest anyone by merely following them for 15 minutes.
Cabermon| 9.19.10 @ 12:53PM
Power tools like circular saws and law enforcement tools are both useful and dangerous. I suggest a law which would:
1) Allow indiscriminate scanning for outstanding wants and warrants.
2) Preclude its use for tracking individuals (either crime suspects or possibly even crime victims) or any other use without a judge's warrant.
Warrants would be available with the same protections as regular search warrants.
QED