Cops with new license plate reading technology

I hate to tell you this, but cops have been doing this for quite some time, even without the magic cameras.

Cops will drive to motels, especially those with bad reputations and they will run plates.

Cops can and will run a plate while their stopped at a stop sign.

Cops will drive through bad neighborhoods and run plates.

That's how they found my car when it was stolen.

That's how I hope they find the thief of my license plate that was stolen last week.

That's how they catch criminals on the lam.

Why do you think individually numbered license plates are issued in the first place?

reply to post by budski

ANY alcohol impairs driving - and if you don't think it does, I suggest you look at the stats for fatalities caused by drunks in their cars.

Many people get killed by drowsy drivers too.

In 2005, 16,885 people died in alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes, accounting for 39% of all traffic-related deaths in the United States

www.cdc.gov...

The National Traffic
Highway Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimates that
there are 100,000 police-reported crashes resulting in 1,550 deaths and 71,000 injuries
annually as the result of drowsy driving.

safeny.com...
I would suggest the figure is far higher than that.
Hard to prove someone crashed from fatigue.

Should we start monitoring people alertness level too?

Second only to riding unbelted, drunk driving is the deadliest risk factor for both drivers and passengers. Although the number of annual alcohol-related highway deaths has declined slightly over the last decade, 29 percent of all the crash fatalities in 2005 involved a driver with a measurable blood alcohol concentration (BAC). Most of the drunk drivers killed had a BAC higher than twice the legal limit. Drivers age 21-24 have the highest percentage of alcohol-related deaths.

www.edmunds.com...

Maybe we should monitor 21-24 yr olds?

Cop reads your plate. "Hey, that guys an insomniac. Pull him over BEFORE he kills someone"

Political correctness kills freedom.






[edit on 20-5-2008 by cutbothways]

reply to post by cutbothways


You know, there was more to Budskis' post than what you responded to.

I will repost a part of it because I want to see you respond.

Originally posted by Budski
Now show me some proof of everything that you are alleging "will happen" including proof of concentration camps,proof of spycams looking in bedroom windows or any of the other nonsense you've been spouting as "truth"

That should keep you going for a while

CT

reply to post by Conspiracy Theorist

Hang it on your bedroom ceiling or in the kitchen, the Smoke Detector Wireless Hidden Spy Camera System blends in anywhere you would normally place a smoke detector. It won’t detect smoke, but it will detect what’s going on in your house when you’re not there. So be sure you don’t use it to take the place of your already existing smoke detector, because it only functions as a camera. Hidden inside is a transmitter that operates on an FCC-approved 2.4 GHz frequency for great range (up to 700 ft.)

www.4hiddenspycameras.com...

There is a solution other than what the elite consider excess population. Why not prevent the poor - for the sake of argument, let us venture a conservative 99% of the world's population - from having children altogether, or if that isn't possible, at least vastly slow their birth rates?

"Eugenics" is a term coined in the latter part of the 19th century by Englishmen Francis Galton to describe the "science" of bettering human stock and the elimination of unwanted characteristics... and individuals. Galton proposed societal intervention for the furtherance of "racial quality," maintaining that "Jews are specialized for a parasitical existence upon other nations" and that "except by sterilization I cannot yet see any way of checking the produce of the unfit who are allowed their liberty and are below the reach of moral control."

www.conspiracyarchive.com...

Could do a little research yourself, and actually contribute to the thread.

reply to post by cutbothways

Could do a little research yourself, and actually contribute to the thread.

You call that research. I call it a cut and paste job.

The smoke detector with a camera in it is nothing new, but nothing in the link you provided says anything about the government installing them outside bedroom windows.

I can show you a teddy bear with a camera in it, doesn't mean the government is spying on toddlers.

Also I looked over your "research" in the second link and failed to see where it says anything about concentration camps for US citizens.

CT

No one seems to have addressed the potential for vehicle plates being matched to current existing insurance coverage as a case for impoundment or even citations issued based on database info which may or may not be up to date causing the individual to fight to have it corrected on their own dime.

Also, address the delay in title/registration transfer. Who knows who had the car before you or what they did that may cause you to be detained or even worse...

Cops monitoring areas repeatedly as tags on certain vehicles are soon to expire, giving them the chance to cite the owner as preventative law enforcement.
The problem is that many of the citations that can be enforced onto an individual can be based on a parked/locked vehicle alone.

Good thing we gots ways of dealing with their toys....

I'd like to see this implemented in our area.

It would slow down the car thieves.

It might also make the streets safer if the potential drunks and people without proper licenses were nabbed.

If I stretch, I can see this being misused but think how fast it could catch people if an amber alert was issued.

I see the good outweighing the bad with this technology

Originally posted by budski
It's really quite simple - if people obeyed the laws of the land, the police wouldn't need to do this.

Can't do the time, don't do the crime.

I have zero sympathy for motorists who behave irresponsibly or illegally.

Law of the Land? Your statement indicates you are ignorant to what the Law of the Land is, maybe you should do some homework and get back to us when you have an understanding of basic law.

These codes and 'laws' are for one thing, to generate illegal and hidden taxes on the traveling public, most traffic citations are FRAUD and Illegal on their face, that is what the Law of the Land says.

Your use of the word illegally also shows you have no clue what you are saying, there is a difference between 'unlawfull' and illeagal. Maybe you should invest in a Blacks Law dictionary?

I have zero sympathy for people who Judge others and do not even know what they are talking about.

Learn some law.

I dont beleive it's about them using our bedroom activities against us, and for those who don't think this has happened before...

edition.cnn.com...

a poignant quote from the article...

"The government should not be in the business of policing the private consensual sexual relations of people," she said(Suzanne Goldberg), adding that the case would be appealed on the grounds that the law violates both the state and federal constitutions."

I think it's more about getting us to willingly allow institutionalized intrusions into our lives.

Some say, "if you have nothing to hide then you shouldn't mind", I say that type of thinking is exactly what law enforcement wants us to think!

Henry David Thoreau said...

"Disobedience is the true foundation of liberty. The obedient must be slaves."
and
"Any fool can make a rule, and any fool will mind it."
and my favorite...
"If the machine of government is of such a nature that it requires you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law."

our govt. will go as far into intruding into our private lives as we will let them.

Please dont take this as me supporting people who drive while suspened, or drunk, or in stolen cars...I support none of that...

I also do not support stregnthing the federal govts powers by allowing yet another intrusion into my private life...to the feds I say, figure out another means to accomplish this...spying on the whole population is not the way.

I fail to see what the big deal is. Why are you upset that the cops have found a better way to catch bad guys?Seriously? They aren't spying on you or bothering innocent people. They are using information that is publicly available to keep the roads and cities safer for me and you.

Don't want them to bother you?
Then don't drive on a suspended liscence.
Don't want them to wait until you get your car to arrest you?
Then don't have open warrants for your arrest.

Simple as that. Theres no "the laws are a farce and tickets are police fraud" to be said here.

I, for one, am very happy that police in my city are doing this.





p.s. I wonder, would you be so opposed to this tech. if it was used to find your stolen car? Would you hate it so much if it was just used to find the guy who raped your daughter and never showed up after making bail? (rhetorical, not your daughter or car)


Edited to fix my horrible spelling.


[edit on 20-5-2008 by Tiloke]

reply to post by Tiloke

I find it a little ironic that you defend govt. intrusions, sorry but thats what i call stuff like this. But then your sig says...

signature
The Bill of Rights (void where prohibited by law)

What happens in the event of a mistaken id or bad info in some database?...so far from what we have seen from TSA/Homeland Security, once your on...good luck getting off, whatever list.

and creating "what if" situations to justify these actions is naive...what if your name ended up on some list and you could not get it off, meanwhile your continuing to be fined, or arrested, or denied access...



[edit on 20-5-2008 by deadbang]

reply to post by deadbang


It is not an "intrusion" to read the plate you yourself put on the front of your car anymore than it is to look at you for a second in passing.

and creating "what if" situations to justify these actions is naive

But right before that , you said;

What happens in the event of a mistaken id or bad info in some database?

I like how you say it is naive to make a "what if" statement right after you make a "what if" statement. Thanks man, I needed that laugh. Unfortunatly for your argument, mine is not a "what if". There are documented cases of this tech. doing just what I said above, finding rapists, murderers stolen cars, habitual drunk drivers, etc,etc.

My sig line refers to the gun laws in some places.

I have read the Bill of Rights, have you? Nowhere in it does it say "the right to drive a car without a license" or "the right to have open warrants for your arrest".


Driving is not a right. Drivers are not a protected class. All drivers agree to the same rules as all the other drivers when they apply for a license. There are consequences to breaking these rules that we all agree to. When someone breaks enough of these rules to justify suspending their driving privileges, it means they are a danger on the road, the same road that you and I drive on every day.


[edit on 20-5-2008 by Tiloke]

This new technology was rolled out some time ago in my region. It was touted in the case of a grisly murder scene here locally, where the license plate evidence was prominent in the prosecution of the accused.

Two men brutally murdered a man, his wife, and their children before setting their house ablaze as the result of a dispute over coc aine.

Personally, I find the technology to be an alarming sign in the rise of the American police-state, but with such emotional appeal locally, the naysayers are silenced.

Here is an article regarding the case, where the technology is mentioned as a sort of footnote to the article...

Poughkeepsie Journal

[edit on 5/20/0808 by jackinthebox]

reply to post by Tiloke


I agree 1000% percent, driving is a privelege not a right...but people drive those cars...and using the argument that "nothing to hide whats the problem" belies our govts willingness to ask for an inch and take a mile.

and yessir, I have indeed read my bill of rights, most of whats in the bill of rights was put there to protect us from govt heavy handedness...particularly the 4th.

If a person is the subject of a warrant, then by all means arrest them...but casting the net as wide as you suggest, is gonna catch more than just crims when hauled in.

and hey, try practising some civilty, no one called you a name...I certainly don't appreciate being referred to as a pedophile, just because youv'e never met me or the implication that I have not read the bill of rights...your not the only one around here who can read man....

reply to post by jackinthebox

Personally, I find the technology to be an alarming sign in the rise of the American police-state

You don't know how right you are. One of the newer technologies related to this may or may not be known. I'm sorry I don't have direct links or sources, but I have first hand knowledge of these technologies through work.

Interesting technology - facial recognition algorithms and software in police cars. Imagine that same cop with cameras mounted on his roof driving around town. Forget license plate scanning. This technology scans your face and matches it against a list of wanted persons (can be optimized by the local law enforcement branch to only scan for dozens/hundreds of faces to speed up matches). This technology lets a cop drive 70 MPH on the highway and in seconds identify a wanted face even if the car is in the oncoming lanes going 70 MPH in the other direction. The system will even do an instant photo recall of the face for visual verification against the possible match photo. Match percentage is quite good, even if the person has a blur such as glasses or a fake beard on.

reply to post by wyattmyatt


And of course, what happens when the match is incorrect? Some innocent person gets ripped out of their car and thrown on the pavement with a gun in their temple.

Then of course, there is the problem of probable cause. What if that innocent person just happened to have a bag of bud in his pocket?

And lastly, there is the direct abuse of power. We've all heard the "matched the description" exuse a million times already.

Talk about freakish timing. Only this morning one of my workmates turned up and said he was stopped by police as he was getting of of his car after parking at work. They asked to see his licence as the registered owner of car he was driving (his brothers) had a suspended licence.
We were trying to figure out how they knew and why they pulled him to start with.

I dont think its a bad thing. It saves them time pulling people at random and if you are suspended you shouldnt be driving in the first place.

Originally posted by jackinthebox
reply to post by wyattmyatt

 

And of course, what happens when the match is incorrect? Some innocent person gets ripped out of their car and thrown on the pavement with a gun in their temple.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. What if this and what if that. Lets not go by "what ifs" and lets go by "whats happened".

Then of course, there is the problem of probable cause. What if that innocent person just happened to have a bag of bud in his pocket?

Then they're not innocent, are they?

Just because you may be innocent of one crime does not gime you free reign to break the rest of the laws.

And lastly, there is the direct abuse of power. We've all heard the "matched the description" exuse a million times already.

There is a big, big difference between "he seemed to match the description" and "Those plates exactly match the plates of a wanted rapist".

Originally posted by VIKINGANT
Only this morning one of my workmates turned up and said he was stopped by police as he was getting of of his car after parking at work. They asked to see his licence as the registered owner of car he was driving (his brothers) had a suspended licence.
We were trying to figure out how they knew and why they pulled him to start with.

Wait, you mean there was a mistaken identity and the cops didnt arrest , tase, shoot or beat him? Guess that blows all those "what ifs" away.

[edit on 20-5-2008 by Tiloke]

This is not news here in California. The CHP (Highway Patrol) has been using them here for awhile- that is why here in California you will get pulled over and ticketed for not having a front license plate. I was stopped for not having a front plate and the officer who cleared me after I put it on told me it was needed for this purpose- this was 6 months ago.

I've been behind on payments before- I know life gets in the way sometimes. But I'm ALL for knocking off ALL the cars whose owners don't have insurance or have a warrant. I've seen WAY too many peoples' lives ruined by uninsured drivers, and the safer and easier we can make the jobs of our safety officers in populated areas the better off we all are.

I was at the MVD the other day getting a temporary tag because mine was stolen and there was a sign there that I didn't think about until now.

It showed a guy in a clown suit and full make-up and the caption read, "Your friends might not recognize you, but we will," and the sign went on to say that their cameras use facial recognition.

I don't know all the details, but illegal aliens recycle identities, besides just stealing them as the occasion suits them. This could put a dent in that.

I think instead of getting mad at the police, we should get mad at the criminals.

Frankly, I'm tired of being a crime victim.

Just since I moved to Albuquerque, right out here in my apartment parking lot, I've had a car stolen, one broken into such that I had to have a new door put on it (I don't know why the moron just didn't break the window), had a license plate stolen, and had all those cars keyed and scratched too many times to count.

I'm tired of these drugged out, brain damaged, psychopaths running the world. If the social order collapses completely, I have an agenda to put into action.