Sign in to follow this  
Jim M

Creeping Surveillance, Where Do We Stand? How Much is Enough?

Recommended Posts

By TAMI ABDOLLAH and ELLIOT SPAGAT | Associated Press | 3 hours, 17 minutes ago in Technology, Politics

 

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A rapidly expanding digital network that uses cameras mounted to traffic signals and police cruisers captures the movements of millions of vehicles across the U.S., regardless of whether the drivers are being investigated by law enforcement.

 

The license plate scanning systems have multiplied across the U.S. over the last decade, funded largely by Homeland Security grants, and judges recently have upheld authorities' rights to keep details from hundreds of millions of scans a secret from the public.

 

Such decisions come as a patchwork of local laws and regulations govern the use of such technology and the distribution of the information they collect, inflaming civil liberties advocates who see this as the next battleground in the fight over high-tech surveillance.

 

"If I'm not being investigated for a crime, there shouldn't be a secret police file on me" that details "where I go, where I shop, where I visit," said Michael Robertson, a tech entrepreneur fighting in court for access to his own files. "That's crazy, Nazi police-type stuff."

 

A San Diego judge has tentatively ruled that a local government agency can deny Robertson's request for scans on his own vehicle under California's open records law because the information pertains to police investigations. Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal heard additional arguments in the case Friday and plans to issue a final decision soon. Robertson said he plans to appeal if the tentative decision stands.

 

more...

 

http://www.newser.com/article/e14dfdb43b474593ab6b4df68bce572d/as-police-scan-millions-of-license-plates-civil-libertarians-question-how-info-is-being-used.html

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not against finding stolen cars or Felons, but why do they need to keep a database of non-offenders? That's where I think we need to draw a line.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yups, stolen cars, child abductors and wanted criminals are fine. The other shit makes London look like Moorea....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This sounds familiar for some reason.

A certain Clash song? Or an old book by George? ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 replies on this thread and 3 on the other. I guess we've lost this battle before it even started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 replies on this thread and 3 on the other. I guess we've lost this battle before it even started.

Discussed multiple time in other threads as well. Bottom line, even if the locals dump the data, it has already been vacuumed into regional data centers that don't abide by local standards. Like it or not, if you drive by or are otherwise scanned, big brother has it. I don't like it a bit but other seem to be resigned to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw on our local news last night that local police departments will soon have a radar gun that can tell if you're texting. I immediately thought, hooray!! but then recanted when I considered how long will it be until they tie it all together and start sending tickets in the mail for all the incidental stuff we do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No worries, it's still possible to lose emails...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

when i was in a state run rehab a long time ago, one of the teachers told us that they consider everyone a criminal, its just whether they act on the feelings or not. congrats, your government hates you and considers you their enemy. its true. the u.s. government is not your friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I've been told the same thing by cops along with "we don't care how we'll get home from work at night, just that we know we'll get home."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 replies on this thread and 3 on the other. I guess we've lost this battle before it even started.

 

It was questioned and discussed well before you noticed the occurrence.,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest One of Five

 

By TAMI ABDOLLAH and ELLIOT SPAGAT | Associated Press | 3 hours, 17 minutes ago in Technology, Politics

 

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A rapidly expanding digital network that uses cameras mounted to traffic signals and police cruisers captures the movements of millions of vehicles across the U.S., regardless of whether the drivers are being investigated by law enforcement.

 

The license plate scanning systems have multiplied across the U.S. over the last decade, funded largely by Homeland Security grants, and judges recently have upheld authorities' rights to keep details from hundreds of millions of scans a secret from the public.

 

Such decisions come as a patchwork of local laws and regulations govern the use of such technology and the distribution of the information they collect, inflaming civil liberties advocates who see this as the next battleground in the fight over high-tech surveillance.

 

"If I'm not being investigated for a crime, there shouldn't be a secret police file on me" that details "where I go, where I shop, where I visit," said Michael Robertson, a tech entrepreneur fighting in court for access to his own files. "That's crazy, Nazi police-type stuff."

 

A San Diego judge has tentatively ruled that a local government agency can deny Robertson's request for scans on his own vehicle under California's open records law because the information pertains to police investigations. Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal heard additional arguments in the case Friday and plans to issue a final decision soon. Robertson said he plans to appeal if the tentative decision stands.

 

more...

 

http://www.newser.com/article/e14dfdb43b474593ab6b4df68bce572d/as-police-scan-millions-of-license-plates-civil-libertarians-question-how-info-is-being-used.html

 

You should see what Google is getting on you... and others on this board. You would freak...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

6 replies on this thread and 3 on the other. I guess we've lost this battle before it even started.

 

It was questioned and discussed well before you noticed the occurrence.,

 

And I'll say it again - they don't do it because they need to or even should, they do it because they can.

 

We are being unreasonably searched and siezed every time the Gov't collects this kind of data. We need to take back our privacy.

 

 

 

By TAMI ABDOLLAH and ELLIOT SPAGAT | Associated Press | 3 hours, 17 minutes ago in Technology, Politics

 

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A rapidly expanding digital network that uses cameras mounted to traffic signals and police cruisers captures the movements of millions of vehicles across the U.S., regardless of whether the drivers are being investigated by law enforcement.

 

The license plate scanning systems have multiplied across the U.S. over the last decade, funded largely by Homeland Security grants, and judges recently have upheld authorities' rights to keep details from hundreds of millions of scans a secret from the public.

 

Such decisions come as a patchwork of local laws and regulations govern the use of such technology and the distribution of the information they collect, inflaming civil liberties advocates who see this as the next battleground in the fight over high-tech surveillance.

 

"If I'm not being investigated for a crime, there shouldn't be a secret police file on me" that details "where I go, where I shop, where I visit," said Michael Robertson, a tech entrepreneur fighting in court for access to his own files. "That's crazy, Nazi police-type stuff."

 

A San Diego judge has tentatively ruled that a local government agency can deny Robertson's request for scans on his own vehicle under California's open records law because the information pertains to police investigations. Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal heard additional arguments in the case Friday and plans to issue a final decision soon. Robertson said he plans to appeal if the tentative decision stands.

 

more...

 

http://www.newser.com/article/e14dfdb43b474593ab6b4df68bce572d/as-police-scan-millions-of-license-plates-civil-libertarians-question-how-info-is-being-used.html

 

You should see what Google is getting on you... and others on this board. You would freak...

 

Don't use Google. No problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I say this phrase from time to time and yes I am a cop. I think you misinterpret the meaning. It isn't a them against us phrase, it is basically saying that if someone tries to harm you do what you have to do to make it home. When someone is trying to prevent me from making it home to my family at night, making it home is all I need to be thinking about. We don't have time to think about how the media is going to rip our actions apart.

 

I am sure there are some high up government branches that harvest the data from license plate readers and such, but I promise you that your local cops have a similar mentality to you about being tracked.

 

Most officers are anti big government.

Yes, I've been told the same thing by cops along with "we don't care how we'll get home from work at night, just that we know we'll get home."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that particular instance, the police officer (a friend) indicated to me that his individual rights exceeded the public's rights and he would prevail in any situation that required the use of a weapon and the recognition of the public right.

 

I don't think that is an odd reaction when you are required to put your life on the line, It also doesn't necessarily make it right. The public also see's when a police shooting inquiry almost always finds for the police and become disgruntled when they perceive that fairness is not being employed in final decision making. People aren't stupid and they know when their rights are being placed subservient to a police officer's decision.

 

I think that there are a couple remedies for that and as discussed on other threads, cameras would go a long way in restoring police trust. The other, is more rigorous hiring standards. The public doesn't need more bullies and incidents of shoot first and ask questions later.

 

I think you are correct about police being anti big government, but they obviously don't see that the role they are playing is such an important part of the growth of big government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure there are some high up government branches that harvest the data from license plate readers and such, but I promise you that your local cops have a similar mentality to you about being tracked.

 

Most officers are anti big government.

That sounds good, but reality looks a bit different from where I'm standing:

http://articles.sun-sentinel.com/2013-08-03/news/fl-palm-license-plate-cameras-20130803_1_plate-data-license-plate-cameras

http://myfox8.com/2014/09/22/burlington-police-trying-out-license-plate-readers/

http://www.al.com/news/mobile/index.ssf/2014/09/more_cameras_on_streets_in_gul.html

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Los-Altos-Police-Department-to-Immediately-Purge-Data-From-License-Plate-Readers-After-One-Year-273174231.html - Oh good, only keeping everything for a year

http://couriernews.suntimes.com/2014/08/25/license-plate-scanners-allow-elgin-police-officers-fight-crime-cars/

http://www.ksat.com/content/pns/ksat/news/2014/08/27/license-plate-reader-targets--4-million-in-unpaid-fines.html

 

That's by no means an exhaustive list. If PDs are anti-big government they should probably quit surveilling every single citizen that drives. Once that data set is created it gets used.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...but they obviously don't see that the role they are playing is such an important part of the growth of big government."

 

I dont know about that. I suppose they could refuse to use the "text gun" and similar things. But the NSA type of stuff is beyond the average patrol officer.

 

I know a local cop who got all excited last summer over an upcoming "seat belt and cell phone" trap. You'd think they would see that as a waste of their time. Bust a guy who has no seat belt one when there's a group of motorcyclists behing him with no helmet on. Craziness.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"...but they obviously don't see that the role they are playing is such an important part of the growth of big government."

 

I dont know about that. I suppose they could refuse to use the "text gun" and similar things. But the NSA type of stuff is beyond the average patrol officer.

 

I know a local cop who got all excited last summer over an upcoming "seat belt and cell phone" trap. You'd think they would see that as a waste of their time. Bust a guy who has no seat belt one when there's a group of motorcyclists behing him with no helmet on. Craziness.

 

The problem for me isn't the individual officer or even scanning plates for outstanding warrants. My problem is the next step of local or state forces retaining the data for a not insignificant period of time 1 month to 1 year. I object even more when that data is uploaded to the DHS regional data center before being deleted from the local data storage. To me, that is a transfer of surveillance data, not a deletion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"...but they obviously don't see that the role they are playing is such an important part of the growth of big government."

 

I dont know about that. I suppose they could refuse to use the "text gun" and similar things. But the NSA type of stuff is beyond the average patrol officer.

 

I know a local cop who got all excited last summer over an upcoming "seat belt and cell phone" trap. You'd think they would see that as a waste of their time. Bust a guy who has no seat belt one when there's a group of motorcyclists behing him with no helmet on. Craziness.

 

The problem for me isn't the individual officer or even scanning plates for outstanding warrants. My problem is the next step of local or state forces retaining the data for a not insignificant period of time 1 month to 1 year. I object even more when that data is uploaded to the DHS regional data center before being deleted from the local data storage. To me, that is a transfer of surveillance data, not a deletion.

 

Data retention and mining is the problem. If they want to do something useful, get a robot to patrol the long term parking lots at any airport and document the car locations by license number. Put a kiosk in the bus stops and let folks find their car by entering the license number.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that there are a couple remedies for that and as discussed on other threads, cameras would go a long way in restoring police trust.

 

Does anyone else find it a bit ironic that in a thread about overuse of cameras, BL is advocating more cameras to film the public? I'm not disagreeing, just that I find it a bit ironic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a "more cameras sometimes" kind of guy myself.

 

Surveillance is a broader topic than just cameras and my biggest concerns with the security state have to do with data, not just pictures.

 

That said, these red light cameras are a revenue scam. They installed the cameras and shortened the length of time the yellow light displays. Guess what? After a lifetime of one yellow light interval, people were used to it and misjudged the shorter interval. Ooop$, I meant to $ay, the $horter interval. Kaching.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a "more cameras sometimes" kind of guy myself.

 

Surveillance is a broader topic than just cameras and my biggest concerns with the security state have to do with data, not just pictures.

 

That said, these red light cameras are a revenue scam. They installed the cameras and shortened the length of time the yellow light displays. Guess what? After a lifetime of one yellow light interval, people were used to it and misjudged the shorter interval. Ooop$, I meant to $ay, the $horter interval. Kaching.

 

It’s a racket!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a "more cameras sometimes" kind of guy myself.

 

Surveillance is a broader topic than just cameras and my biggest concerns with the security state have to do with data, not just pictures.

 

That said, these red light cameras are a revenue scam. They installed the cameras and shortened the length of time the yellow light displays. Guess what? After a lifetime of one yellow light interval, people were used to it and misjudged the shorter interval. Ooop$, I meant to $ay, the $horter interval. Kaching.

Try speed cameras in most places if you want scams. In Maryland, an audit of speed cameras ended up in more than 3,000 refunds due to errors. Naturally, my son went through one the day after they turned them back on.

 

Speed and red light cameras are huge cash generators for the companies that install and operate them as well as the communities. Shorten the cycle, set the speed camera right after the limit goes down and tweak the sensitivity? What could be easier as a money grab.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think that there are a couple remedies for that and as discussed on other threads, cameras would go a long way in restoring police trust.

 

Does anyone else find it a bit ironic that in a thread about overuse of cameras, BL is advocating more cameras to film the public? I'm not disagreeing, just that I find it a bit ironic.

 

I see you don't get it as usual. The cameras may be filming the public but allows the public to judge the actions of the police. More accountability from the police, means less infringement on the public's free movement and natural rights.

 

The expansion of electronic devices which allows the police to do their jobs is a necessary evil. The only way for the people to limit that intrusion is by making them accountable for their actions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm a "more cameras sometimes" kind of guy myself.

 

Surveillance is a broader topic than just cameras and my biggest concerns with the security state have to do with data, not just pictures.

 

That said, these red light cameras are a revenue scam. They installed the cameras and shortened the length of time the yellow light displays. Guess what? After a lifetime of one yellow light interval, people were used to it and misjudged the shorter interval. Ooop$, I meant to $ay, the $horter interval. Kaching.

The data interconnectedness is incredible.

 

I went through one of the deemed constitutional Border Patrol interior checkpoints on I-25 a couple weeks ago. I was in a rental car, and the Border Patrol agent was quizzing me on where I was going and where I was dropping off the rental car because I suppose they had pulled up my rental contract in the 20 seconds between when I passed the trees of assorted scanners and cameras and when I came to a stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doubt they had pulled up your rental agreement, probably looked at the registration of the car and saw it was registered to a rental company. Also, once you get used to looking at cars every day it isn't hard to figure out what ones are rentals. They are typically clean and don't have very much personal stuff inside or outside and typically have a rental car company sticker on them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doubt they had pulled up your rental agreement, probably looked at the registration of the car and saw it was registered to a rental company. Also, once you get used to looking at cars every day it isn't hard to figure out what ones are rentals. They are typically clean and don't have very much personal stuff inside or outside and typically have a rental car company sticker on them.

I really think they had it. After they asked me where I picked it up (El Paso) and when, they asked "And you're dropping it off at Albuquerque, right?" or something like that.

 

It would be highly improbable for them to assume that it was a one-way rental and then subsequently guess the location of drop off correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That I don't know, but I know that it is hard enough to get insurance companies to talk to our government system about what cars are insured and not so I can't see getting rental companies to do that quick.

 

I will say that you might be right, but don't discredit officers who spend their entire day every day looking at people and vehicle and can make incredibly accurate guesses.

 

When I stop a car I can usually get a pretty good idea from talking to them what is going on and where they might be headed. I don't know your exact situation but half of my entertainment during the day is trying to figure that stuff out without asking and then confirming it to see how close I was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

By TAMI ABDOLLAH and ELLIOT SPAGAT | Associated Press | 3 hours, 17 minutes ago in Technology, Politics

 

LOS ANGELES (AP) — A rapidly expanding digital network that uses cameras mounted to traffic signals and police cruisers captures the movements of millions of vehicles across the U.S., regardless of whether the drivers are being investigated by law enforcement.

 

The license plate scanning systems have multiplied across the U.S. over the last decade, funded largely by Homeland Security grants, and judges recently have upheld authorities' rights to keep details from hundreds of millions of scans a secret from the public.

 

Such decisions come as a patchwork of local laws and regulations govern the use of such technology and the distribution of the information they collect, inflaming civil liberties advocates who see this as the next battleground in the fight over high-tech surveillance.

 

"If I'm not being investigated for a crime, there shouldn't be a secret police file on me" that details "where I go, where I shop, where I visit," said Michael Robertson, a tech entrepreneur fighting in court for access to his own files. "That's crazy, Nazi police-type stuff."

 

A San Diego judge has tentatively ruled that a local government agency can deny Robertson's request for scans on his own vehicle under California's open records law because the information pertains to police investigations. Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal heard additional arguments in the case Friday and plans to issue a final decision soon. Robertson said he plans to appeal if the tentative decision stands.

 

more...

 

http://www.newser.com/article/e14dfdb43b474593ab6b4df68bce572d/as-police-scan-millions-of-license-plates-civil-libertarians-question-how-info-is-being-used.html

 

 

 

Drones, Plate Readers, and Liberty

 

...Three years ago the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that tracking a person’s movement without a warrant was an unconstitutional search. In that case, the search was made through a physical intrusion: placing a GPS device on the suspect’s car. But tracking someone remotely is no different. Virginia law-enforcement agencies have been doing that without a warrant, which is bad enough. But they’re also doing it without a reason—and that’s an outrage.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PA State Troopers tried to make their license plate reading SUV look like a Google Maps vehicle

 

...Pennsylvania State Police tweeted back that the vehicle wasn't one of theirs, despite the markings and registration. A trooper with PA police also told Gizmodo it wasn't theirs. But Pennsylvania State Police admitted by late afternoon Thursday that the mystery SUV was indeed part of their fleet, but denied knowing anything about the Google Maps decals, Motherboard reported. They are investigating how the stickers got on the SUV and claims they have since been removed. Google is also launching its own investigation into the matter.

License plate readers aren't used by just state police. Last year, a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the ACLU revealed that the US Justice Department was storing hundreds of millions of license plate tracking files. Motherboard spoke to Brandon Worf about the incredible abilities of these license plate readers to track people's movements. You can find his insight here.

 

 

Does the government really need all that information? If so, why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PA State Troopers tried to make their license plate reading SUV look like a Google Maps vehicle

 

...Pennsylvania State Police tweeted back that the vehicle wasn't one of theirs, despite the markings and registration. A trooper with PA police also told Gizmodo it wasn't theirs. But Pennsylvania State Police admitted by late afternoon Thursday that the mystery SUV was indeed part of their fleet, but denied knowing anything about the Google Maps decals, Motherboard reported. They are investigating how the stickers got on the SUV and claims they have since been removed. Google is also launching its own investigation into the matter.

 

License plate readers aren't used by just state police. Last year, a Freedom of Information Act request filed by the ACLU revealed that the US Justice Department was storing hundreds of millions of license plate tracking files. Motherboard spoke to Brandon Worf about the incredible abilities of these license plate readers to track people's movements. You can find his insight here.

 

Does the government really need all that information? If so, why?

Just in case someone important enough in the gubmint decides they feel like someone needs to get tracked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ICE using license plate readers to track gun show customers

 

Emails reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show agents with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency crafted a plan in 2010 to use license-plate readers—devices that record the plate numbers of all passing cars—at gun shows in Southern California, including one in Del Mar, not far from the Mexican border.

 

Agents then compared that information to cars that crossed the border, hoping to find gun smugglers...

 

 

It didn't work out.

 

Last year, the DEA admitted to having a plan to do the same thing. They said the plan was never pursued.

 

The ACLU objected.

 

The DEA’s statement alleviates some concerns, but if the program was cancelled, why didn’t we get any documents reflecting that decision in response to our FOIA request? The agency should now release such documents, and also create and release a written policy that it will not target First Amendment-protected activity in the future.

 

While in general we have not opposed the use of ALPRs for their stated purpose of checking plates against "hot lists" of known or suspected lawbreakers — provided the data on everyone else is not retained — we have serious concerns about using the technology in a way that is specifically targeted at people exercising their constitutionally protected rights.

 

 

The ACLU's concern seems to be with show attendees' right of assembly but I'd say that's not the only right being targeted by the allegedly-cancelled plan.

 

Why are the DEA and ICE doing this? Isn't that why we have an AFT? At the period of time in question, the ATF should have had no trouble getting the license plate numbers of smuggers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ICE using license plate readers to track gun show customers

 

Emails reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show agents with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency crafted a plan in 2010 to use license-plate readers—devices that record the plate numbers of all passing cars—at gun shows in Southern California, including one in Del Mar, not far from the Mexican border.

 

Agents then compared that information to cars that crossed the border, hoping to find gun smugglers...

 

 

It didn't work out.

 

Last year, the DEA admitted to having a plan to do the same thing. They said the plan was never pursued.

 

The ACLU objected.

 

The DEA’s statement alleviates some concerns, but if the program was cancelled, why didn’t we get any documents reflecting that decision in response to our FOIA request? The agency should now release such documents, and also create and release a written policy that it will not target First Amendment-protected activity in the future.

 

While in general we have not opposed the use of ALPRs for their stated purpose of checking plates against "hot lists" of known or suspected lawbreakers — provided the data on everyone else is not retained — we have serious concerns about using the technology in a way that is specifically targeted at people exercising their constitutionally protected rights.

 

 

The ACLU's concern seems to be with show attendees' right of assembly but I'd say that's not the only right being targeted by the allegedly-cancelled plan.

 

Why are the DEA and ICE doing this? Isn't that why we have an AFT? At the period of time in question, the ATF should have had no trouble getting the license plate numbers of smuggers.

 

They are doing it because we have allowed them the use of technology far beyond what should be allowed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, I thought the ACLU were liberal pansies to be hated?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After 9/11 we have just bent over and stayed over "to be safe". Fuck that. I went to a college game Saturday at the big* stadium, women can't have a purse larger than a clutch, they do give out plastic bags, nice for carrying feminine products, huh, have to go through a metal detector while you put your cell phone in a tray.

 

I rarely bother getting upset because almost nobody cares because we need to be "safe". As trying and pedantic as Publius can be at least he is consistently on this, well, as long as it's about gun rights. Was at the game with my sister and BIL, he is career LE now working for the DEA. They don't think this is a problem or even an issue. It may take getting to the point where you have to strip and wear government approved pajamas to fly or attend a public event. Sorry, I know it's thread drift but giving up our rights is all related.

 

*big means the publicly funded stadium for the privately owned football team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...

 

I rarely bother getting upset because almost nobody cares because we need to be "safe". As trying and pedantic as Publius can be at least he is consistently on this, well, as long as it's about gun rights. ..

 

You seem to have missed the majority of my posts in this thread. 4 posts not about guns in any way, one related to guns, and you only see the one?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

...

 

I rarely bother getting upset because almost nobody cares because we need to be "safe". As trying and pedantic as Publius can be at least he is consistently on this, well, as long as it's about gun rights. ..

 

You seem to have missed the majority of my posts in this thread. 4 posts not about guns in any way, one related to guns, and you only see the one?

 

If I subtract the old interstate commerce and now the 2A posts from your total I would only have to read through a handful. Sorry, but I have better things to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...Sorry, I know it's thread drift but giving up our rights is all related.

 

...

 

Well, at least we can agree that our rights are all related, even if you can't detect my posts about some of them. And, of course, we can all agree on the greatness of Favre.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^^^^^| With this, BL shows that he understands the opposition to additional infringement upon any of our enumerated rights.

 

I think that just went over most everybody's heads here.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

^^^^^| With this, BL shows that he understands the opposition to additional infringement upon any of our enumerated rights.

 

I think that just went over most everybody's heads here.....

 

 

I saw it and ignored it. Seems AGITC has been picking a lot of fights recently and I'll save any response until he sobers up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

^^^^^| With this, BL shows that he understands the opposition to additional infringement upon any of our enumerated rights.

 

I think that just went over most everybody's heads here.....

 

 

I saw it and ignored it. Seems AGITC has been picking a lot of fights recently and I'll save any response until he sobers up.

 

 

How is that picking a fight??? He was agreeing with you. And you with him. You and others here seem to be suggesting that enough is enough and some negligible gains in public safety are not worth the encroachment on our liberties. Or are you backpedaling on that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never backtrack when it comes to civil liberties and I have posted numerous threads on the subject. I must have sped through Ches'post which I admit that I do on occasion. I'll apologize to him tomorrow but for now I have an early morning meeting across town at 6am. So it's sign off time for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

ICE using license plate readers to track gun show customers

 

Emails reviewed by The Wall Street Journal show agents with the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency crafted a plan in 2010 to use license-plate readers—devices that record the plate numbers of all passing cars—at gun shows in Southern California, including one in Del Mar, not far from the Mexican border.

 

Agents then compared that information to cars that crossed the border, hoping to find gun smugglers...

 

 

It didn't work out.

 

Last year, the DEA admitted to having a plan to do the same thing. They said the plan was never pursued.

 

The ACLU objected.

 

The DEA’s statement alleviates some concerns, but if the program was cancelled, why didn’t we get any documents reflecting that decision in response to our FOIA request? The agency should now release such documents, and also create and release a written policy that it will not target First Amendment-protected activity in the future.

 

While in general we have not opposed the use of ALPRs for their stated purpose of checking plates against "hot lists" of known or suspected lawbreakers — provided the data on everyone else is not retained — we have serious concerns about using the technology in a way that is specifically targeted at people exercising their constitutionally protected rights.

 

 

The ACLU's concern seems to be with show attendees' right of assembly but I'd say that's not the only right being targeted by the allegedly-cancelled plan.

 

Why are the DEA and ICE doing this? Isn't that why we have an AFT? At the period of time in question, the ATF should have had no trouble getting the license plate numbers of smuggers.

 

They are doing it because we have allowed them the use of technology far beyond what should be allowed.

 

 

That's more of an answer to "why is the government doing this" than my question. These specific agencies seem to me to have jobs other than monitoring who goes to a gun show.

 

But it turns out the ATF was involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every toll road in Texas has records of every car or truck that has ever entered

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Every toll road in Texas has records of every car or truck that has ever entered

 

Targeting everyone is different from targeting a specific group, as the ACLU pointed out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had said before that one day there would be someone sitting in the white house who was not nearly as well intentioned as Obama or even GWB, and that we would come to regret giving so much power to them. We are just about there, another year and we will know just how dangerous that was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Every toll road in Texas has records of every car or truck that has ever entered

 

Targeting everyone is different from targeting a specific group, as the ACLU pointed out.

 

 

There is a point there.

 

There is no reason for Texas or any other toll road to maintain the recorded data except to ensure that tolls are paid to use the road. Once that has been established, the data should be destroyed. If the police could make a case for, say, stolen car detection or other legitimate police function then that sort of filter should be placed at the point of collection.

 

When the Patriot act came out and folks could demand Library records I questioned it since the library has an inventory problem, not a history problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Every toll road in Texas has records of every car or truck that has ever entered

 

Targeting everyone is different from targeting a specific group, as the ACLU pointed out.

 

 

There is a point there.

 

There is no reason for Texas or any other toll road to maintain the recorded data except to ensure that tolls are paid to use the road. Once that has been established, the data should be destroyed. If the police could make a case for, say, stolen car detection or other legitimate police function then that sort of filter should be placed at the point of collection.

 

When the Patriot act came out and folks could demand Library records I questioned it since the library has an inventory problem, not a history problem.

 

 

NSA data storage is an evil that many don't know or care about. All it takes is a law that allows for expanded background checks and software that allows for deep examination of files and all of us are dead meat. Imagine someone with the ability to listen to every phone conversation that you ever had once they started collecting data, or every email or computer comment, or camera files that allow one to see most everywhere you went. Pretty sordid and very dangerous if nothing is done to limit collection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Every toll road in Texas has records of every car or truck that has ever entered

 

Targeting everyone is different from targeting a specific group, as the ACLU pointed out.

 

 

There is a point there.

 

There is no reason for Texas or any other toll road to maintain the recorded data except to ensure that tolls are paid to use the road. Once that has been established, the data should be destroyed. If the police could make a case for, say, stolen car detection or other legitimate police function then that sort of filter should be placed at the point of collection.

 

When the Patriot act came out and folks could demand Library records I questioned it since the library has an inventory problem, not a history problem.

 

 

NSA data storage is an evil that many don't know or care about. All it takes is a law that allows for expanded background checks and software that allows for deep examination of files and all of us are dead meat. Imagine someone with the ability to listen to every phone conversation that you ever had once they started collecting data, or every email or computer comment, or camera files that allow one to see most everywhere you went. Pretty sordid and very dangerous if nothing is done to limit collection.

 

 

Cloud storage devices are a good investment. You just need to make sure you are keeping up with the technology.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until they stop my neighbor from jerking off to pornography then the surveillance is insufficient.

 

That's a really interesting statement. But, if they are trying to stop your neighbor how do you know they won't catch you first.

 

Kinda reminds me of the guy who kept demanding that the police stop speeders on his street. His wife was the first one they caught, then him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ICE License Plate Readers
 

Quote

 

A no-bid contract awarded in December by the Department of Homeland Security will allow ICE "access to a commercially available License Plate Reader (LPR) database." Though the contract recipient is not identified in public documents, The Verge (which first uncovered the contract's existence) reports that ICE will use a database built and maintained by Vigilant Solutions, a California-based company that partners with law enforcement agencies across the country to collect scans of law-abiding citizens' plates.

...

The Verge also reports that DHS experimented with giving ICE access to license plate scanner databases in 2012, but the Obama administration ultimately backed away from the idea because of privacy concerns. The Trump administration, which has made it a priority to apprehend and deport illegal immigrants—even ones who pose no apparent risk to public safety or national security—seems to have no such qualms.

 

I feel safer already.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, phillysailor said:

First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

Well, OK. Not sure what that has to do with license plate readers.

5 hours ago, Captain Gigi said:

Why do you think Net Neutrality disappeared in America? In Canada, it still holds, esp., under the current PM's governance; it holds because of what happened back in 2005:

 

Well, OK. Not sure what that has to do with license plate readers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Well, OK. Not sure what that has to do with license plate readers.

Well, OK. Not sure what that has to do with license plate readers.

Data gathering can be used to help society ...it can also be used for political purposed to discredit the opposition 

OH LOOK !   Our visa card records show that this politician paid for  2 gin and tonics at 18:OO. Then our  license plate reader recorded the politician driving at 18:15 

Headlines in the paper...DRUNK DRIVING ...

dangerous 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, slug zitski said:

Data gathering can be used to help society ...it can also be used for political purposed to discredit the opposition 

OH LOOK !   Our visa card records show that this politician paid for  2 gin and tonics at 18:OO. Then our  license plate reader recorded the politician driving at 18:15 

Headlines in the paper...DRUNK DRIVING ...

dangerous 

A politician paid for his own drinks?

Some lobbyist needs to be fired.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Well, OK. Not sure what that has to do with license plate readers.

Well, OK. Not sure what that has to do with license plate readers.

I quoted Pastor Neimoller's poem because, at first, the government will pledge to only use the data one way. Then another, and soon the use of the info will be in common practice. The creeping totalitarian bureaucracy can't stop itself. It's what they do. 

Give to the ACLU. I do. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, phillysailor said:

I quoted Pastor Neimoller's poem because, at first, the government will pledge to only use the data one way. Then another, and soon the use of the info will be in common practice. The creeping totalitarian bureaucracy can't stop itself. It's what they do. 

Give to the ACLU. I do. 

OK, fair enough. I didn't make the connection but now that I do, I agree.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just look at all the leaks !  These people were entrusted with data...and they leaked it for political purpose 

the future does not look good 

soon they will be leaking your health data, financial data, anything that packs a political punch 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/28/2018 at 9:11 AM, phillysailor said:

I quoted Pastor Neimoller's poem because, at first, the government will pledge to only use the data one way. Then another, and soon the use of the info will be in common practice. The creeping totalitarian bureaucracy can't stop itself. It's what they do. 

Give to the ACLU. I do. 

Philly - you have just perfectly illustrated why many of us are opposed to prohibitions that infringe upon enumerated rights - our government's propensity to stretch precedent to suit the cause du jour.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s also why restrictions on gunz are going to have to come by referendum, not mere legislative action. A sea change, not just incremental action. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, A guy in the Chesapeake said:

Philly - you have just perfectly illustrated why many of us are opposed to prohibitions that infringe upon enumerated rights - our government's propensity to stretch precedent to suit the cause du jour.   

Welcome to the Personal Freedom bus. 

Toll is membership in the ACLU. It's getting crowded now that the Fiscal Responsibility Express train broke down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

So Raz'r and philly, tell us all about how much you agree with the ACLU

Just because I support the ACLU doesn't mean I agree with all of their positions and causes. Their charter is to defend all rights & freedoms. I'm a frickin' private citizen with my own opinions about American laws and society.

If an Amendment (or interpretation of said Amendment) is changed to place punctuation where required, or courts & the legislature require gun ownership to be subject to reasonable regulations then I'm totally cool with that. And you (& the ACLU) can suck eggs. 

In my opinion, my right to life and health outweigh Armalite & Colt's desire to make a profit. I'm ok being discordant in my views with the ACLU on this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So all this creeping surveillance is OK when it's only creeping up on evil gun owners?

33 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

you (& the ACLU) can suck eggs. 

On 1/28/2018 at 9:11 AM, phillysailor said:

The creeping totalitarian bureaucracy can't stop itself. It's what they do. 

Give to the ACLU. I do. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

So Raz'r and philly, tell us all about how much you agree with the ACLU

Engaging you in a discussion about tools is about the same as choosing a boot in the Nutz. Go flog yourself somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

So all this creeping surveillance is OK when it's only creeping up on evil gun owners?

 

Tom, I'd prefer the will of the people speak through ballot box initiatives to start to settle gun-control regulation issues. So it wouldn't be the creeps of the government imposing rules on gun production, onwnership, storage and design... it would be the creeps next door and down the street and across the country. You know, your neighbors and fellow citizens. It's called "society."

Life is a series of compromises. You and I would draw the lines differently on this issue. We live in a democracy, are free to have discordant views and seek happiness in our own way. When rights conflict, let the people decide how to resolve the problem. No one side gets to choose the only correct path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Tom, I'd prefer the will of the people speak through ballot box initiatives to start to settle gun-control regulation issues. So it wouldn't be the creeps of the government imposing rules on gun production, onwnership, storage and design... it would be the creeps next door and down the street and across the country. You know, your neighbors and fellow citizens. It's called "society."

Life is a series of compromises. You and I would draw the lines differently on this issue. We live in a democracy, are free to have discordant views and seek happiness in our own way. When rights conflict, let the people decide how to resolve the problem. No one side gets to choose the only correct path.

I just erased the reply I was composing - 'cause I think that this is exactly the right answer.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"A third party could appeal to the middle ground of America and leave the strident idiots on the sideline"

And as soon as it began to gain traction, it's positions would be co-opted by one of the majors in the same way that elements of the Populist and Progressive parties were picked up by both parties, not to mention the John Birch Society, Americans for a New American Century and Know Nothings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, phillysailor said:

Tom, I'd prefer the will of the people speak through ballot box initiatives to start to settle gun-control regulation issues. So it wouldn't be the creeps of the government imposing rules on gun production, onwnership, storage and design... it would be the creeps next door and down the street and across the country. You know, your neighbors and fellow citizens. It's called "society."

Life is a series of compromises. You and I would draw the lines differently on this issue. We live in a democracy, are free to have discordant views and seek happiness in our own way. When rights conflict, let the people decide how to resolve the problem. No one side gets to choose the only correct path.

Majority rule and the protection of individual rights sometimes do not go hand in hand. Hence the need for things like due process for all protected rights, even those you'd prefer not to protect. There might be a majority who want to use our ridiculous "no fly" list as a "no buy" list but the majority can do that after repealing the second amendment. Meanwhile, I'm glad the ACLU likes to apply due process to all of our rights.

In any case, be careful what you ask for. Compliance rates with confiscation programs like the one in CT are quite low and similarly, the majority of people who hold (held?) a "lifetime" pistol permit in NY haven't renewed. The Uncooperative majority in both places simply won't comply. What then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

Majority rule and the protection of individual rights sometimes do not go hand in hand. Hence the need for things like due process for all protected rights, even those you'd prefer not to protect. There might be a majority who want to use our ridiculous "no fly" list as a "no buy" list but the majority can do that after repealing the second amendment. Meanwhile, I'm glad the ACLU likes to apply due process to all of our rights.

In any case, be careful what you ask for. Compliance rates with confiscation programs like the one in CT are quite low and similarly, the majority of people who hold (held?) a "lifetime" pistol permit in NY haven't renewed. The Uncooperative majority in both places simply won't comply. What then?

Take it to "no one gives a shit anymore" anarchy

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/30/2018 at 7:27 PM, Raz'r said:

Take it to "no one gives a shit anymore" anarchy

Looks like I did. No .22-related content.

Anyway, Police Body Cameras Getting Facial Recognition
 

Quote

 

...

Currently, photographs of 117 million Americans—nearly half the country's population—are stored in a facial recognition database that can be accessed by the FBI.

According to a report from the Government Accountability Office, the FBI's use of face recognition technology has scant oversight and the bureau does little to test for false positives and racial bias when looking for suspects. Yet facial recognition technologies often struggle with identifying members of some ethnic groups.

Forty-two different groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, and the National Urban League, raised these concerns in an open letter to Axon's ethics board. In their statement, the groups called body cameras with real-time facial recognition "categorically unethical to deploy"


 

The linked study of FR tech contained this:
 

Quote

 

Although we did not set out to test this, given the ethnic diversity of Australian citizens used as stimuli in this study, we conducted a post-hoc comparison of face matching accuracy for Caucasian and non-Caucasian faces. Three independent judges coded the ethnicity of target faces and we then compared item accuracy for Caucasian and non-Caucasian target subsets (see S1 Data for coding criteria, item ethnicity and itemised accuracy). Surprisingly, this analysis revealed higher overall accuracy for non-Caucasian targets (n = 133; M = 52.3%; SD = 19.0%) compared to Caucasian targets (n = 587; M = 48.1%; SD = 17.7%) [t (726) = 2.45, p <0.05, Cohen’s d = 0.23]. We then performed a subject-level analysis by computing face matching performance on Caucasian and non-Caucasian subsets separately for each participant. Analysis of subject performance also revealed higher accuracy on non-Caucasian compared with Caucasian target faces, driven by non-Caucasian foil faces attracting fewer False Alarm [F (1,76) = 3.92, p = .052, ηp2 = .049] and Misidentification errors [F (1,76) = 10.64, p < 0.05, ηp2 = .123]. All interactions between target ethnicity and group were non-significant (F < 1; for full details of this analysis see S1 Text).

This result is opposite to that reported in similar face matching studies, where other race faces attract more matching errors than own-race faces [16]. One possible explanation for this discrepancy is that the FR algorithm selected more confusable foils when searching for Caucasian targets compared to non-Caucasian targets.

 

Hmm... White people all look the same if you pick people who all look the same. Or something.

A cop in a crowd can't scan every face and compare it to a memorized database of people who are wanted for crimes. His camera will soon be able to do that and it's an undeniably useful capability for law enforcement. Just for that reason you can't say it's categorically unethical to deploy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

image.png.bd0ab7e0019729d0454692a31d708e8f.png

Yeah, it almost makes you feel like somebody's watching you

I saw a news brief the other day about a Chinese network company that is working for the Chinese gov't putting the whole country under surveillance. It has the ability to identify people and vehicles (including bicycles, apparently); the spokesperson claimed that they currently have most of the major cities wired and they know more than half the people on more than half the streets, at all times.

This isn't going to go away.

The freedom we enjoyed and took for granted is gone, and unfortunately the only thing that will bring it back will be the collapse of civilization. Maybe it won't be so bad. I don't really care any more, anybody spying on me should be forewarned that they are going to be mighty bored.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

privacy != freedom

The risk is when there is an expectation of privacy, that privacy is violated, and the data is selectively used to compromise someone either through extortion or prosecution, or the threat of same. If we had no such expectations, and all data was public all the time, those threats are substantially mitigated if not eliminated. You can do whatever you want, it is just that everyone will know about it. There would be no hiding anything. A case could be made that such a world would stifle creativity and independence, but a case could also be made that it would be liberating, that it would be more like turning the light on and finding there is no monster under the bed or in the closet. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites