License plate recognition system
- Thread starter Mandirigma
- Start date
- Status
Not only can cell phones be used to eavesdrop, they continuosly talk to the netweork so there location is known to the system.
The initial resolution is to what cell the phone is located in (or last identified itself to), but they can be located by either Time Difference Of Arrival (TDOA) or by having the phone send its location from GPS on command.
The error is around 30 meters.
No warrent is required to use the phones location broadcast to track you, just a few racks of equipment in a van.
No voice is intercepted, just the digital phone network data.
As for license plate systems, Dulles Airport in Virginia has a relatively sophisticated system.
Plates are scanned on entry, and if you forget your cars location they can tell you what row it is in. That means they scanned the parked cars again.
The initial resolution is to what cell the phone is located in (or last identified itself to), but they can be located by either Time Difference Of Arrival (TDOA) or by having the phone send its location from GPS on command.
The error is around 30 meters.
No warrent is required to use the phones location broadcast to track you, just a few racks of equipment in a van.
No voice is intercepted, just the digital phone network data.
As for license plate systems, Dulles Airport in Virginia has a relatively sophisticated system.
Plates are scanned on entry, and if you forget your cars location they can tell you what row it is in. That means they scanned the parked cars again.
thexrayboy
Member
History shows that technological innovations always have a dark side. A price of some sort to be paid. When you combine the new technologies for data acquisition, storage and mining with the essentially unlimited resources of big government it becomes possible to track virtually every act of every citizen every day if big government chooses to do so. Anybody who fails to see the negative ramifications of such power fails to grasp the true meaning of freedom. One of the most important freedoms one can have is the freedom to be left alone. Now Big Brother can peer over your shoulder virtually 24 hours a day. That is not freedom in my book.
Ok. I can tell you exactly what the potential benefits of the license plate recognition system are to law enforcement and the community in general.
So tell me exactly what the "dark side" of this license plate recognition system is apt to be?
I've heard the dire warning over and over, but it can only be described in the vaguest of generalities; "they can watch you", "they can keep track of you", "they will know where you are", etc, etc. I still can't fathom, in realistic and pragmatic terms, what ominous misuse is likely to occur which cannot occur already ... particularly where gun ownership is concerned.
If someone could demonstrate it to me, they might just win me over to their way of thinking. Until then, and I'm sorry to have to say it, I'm just squinting from the glare of the tinfoil hats.
Last edited:
thexrayboy
Member
Lawdog has stated some of the negative implications. I really do not know
for certain at this time what the exact negatives for this particular system could be. I merely made the generalized statement that virtually everything man creates can be misused, thus the dark side. This system will be no different. I'd like to hear how it will benefit me and my children directly. Otherwise I can see no valid reason for government to have it, use it or need it. History, for those who study it, is replete with countless episodes of good intentions and invention being perverted.
for certain at this time what the exact negatives for this particular system could be. I merely made the generalized statement that virtually everything man creates can be misused, thus the dark side. This system will be no different. I'd like to hear how it will benefit me and my children directly. Otherwise I can see no valid reason for government to have it, use it or need it. History, for those who study it, is replete with countless episodes of good intentions and invention being perverted.
Lawdog stated that the system could be used to track spouses or run data on vehicles in gun store parking lots... things that can very easily done manually right now.
He also asserted that the system could be used to gather data regarding the location of 720k vehicles per car per shift... a function that would serve no conceivable purpose to anyone as far as I am able to determine.
No disrespect to Lawdog, or anyone else, but I am at a complete loss as to what truly new (and practical) misuse this system could be applied.
The system is designed specifically to be utilized for vehicle theft recovery; a role in which it functions extremely effectively. It's efficacy in recovering stolen automobiles will dramatically reduce the number of man hours per vehicle recovery, thereby dramatically reducing the cost to the taxpayer (you and your children) of performing this function. Further, effective vehicle recovery dramatically reduces the payout of insurance claims by auto insurance companies which has the effect of reducing premiums to the consumer (you and your children). I could go on if you would like, but I think you understand.
On the one hand, I don't necessarily like this system.
On the other hand, the genie's out of the bottle. If we truly wanted to, we could enforce installation of an on-star type system on every car, so we'd positivily know where every car is, every moment*.
On the nice side you could give it black-box protection and hook it into the crash sensors as a 'safety feature' and you could have emergency forces automatically dispatched in case of a serious accident.
Still, you'd be able to trace any car's movements.
Next step: Mandatory implanted RFID chips. Stick a sensor in the car, and you'll know the occupants as well. Put it in public buildings, stores and such, and you'll be able to track at least half of people's movements. 90% of the remaining time they'll be at home.
So cheer up. We have a lot further to go for the police state. Don't forget that all this automation has the tendency to drown anybody trying to go through it in data.
*Excluding shielded areas like a garage or tunnel, and action against the transmitter.
On the other hand, the genie's out of the bottle. If we truly wanted to, we could enforce installation of an on-star type system on every car, so we'd positivily know where every car is, every moment*.
On the nice side you could give it black-box protection and hook it into the crash sensors as a 'safety feature' and you could have emergency forces automatically dispatched in case of a serious accident.
Still, you'd be able to trace any car's movements.
Next step: Mandatory implanted RFID chips. Stick a sensor in the car, and you'll know the occupants as well. Put it in public buildings, stores and such, and you'll be able to track at least half of people's movements. 90% of the remaining time they'll be at home.
So cheer up. We have a lot further to go for the police state. Don't forget that all this automation has the tendency to drown anybody trying to go through it in data.
*Excluding shielded areas like a garage or tunnel, and action against the transmitter.
Thin Black Line
Member
Actually it's a pill and there's an RFID in it....
http://appft1.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph...13".PGNR.&OS=DN/20070008113&RS=DN/20070008113
K3
Member
To CFriesen:
Maybe you're not getting it.
What I want to know is why you think constantly expanding government abilities for the sake of security is such a great idea, especially if the technology can potentially be abused? Do you seriously think that our government, or any for that matter, is not going to use these newfound abilities in an improper manner? Note that I said improper and not illegal. The law is not always right. Governments have historically been in the business of control. This will not change. Anybody who doesn't believe this is either naive or doesn't mind.
I hate comments like 'Well, if you're not a criminal you have nothing to worry about'. You see, a newly passed law like an AWB, if worded the right way, can generate hundreds of thousands of brand new felons instantly. Do you still want to sit there and say law-abiding citizens have no worry? Hogwash.
The majority of people in this country are far too willing to trade liberty for security. This nation is full of weak-willed lazy dolts who don't want to lose their big screen TV. We're a lot closer to becoming European Socialists than anyone realizes.
Maybe you're not getting it.
What I want to know is why you think constantly expanding government abilities for the sake of security is such a great idea, especially if the technology can potentially be abused? Do you seriously think that our government, or any for that matter, is not going to use these newfound abilities in an improper manner? Note that I said improper and not illegal. The law is not always right. Governments have historically been in the business of control. This will not change. Anybody who doesn't believe this is either naive or doesn't mind.
I hate comments like 'Well, if you're not a criminal you have nothing to worry about'. You see, a newly passed law like an AWB, if worded the right way, can generate hundreds of thousands of brand new felons instantly. Do you still want to sit there and say law-abiding citizens have no worry? Hogwash.
The majority of people in this country are far too willing to trade liberty for security. This nation is full of weak-willed lazy dolts who don't want to lose their big screen TV. We're a lot closer to becoming European Socialists than anyone realizes.
1. Any technology, including your firearms, can be abused and misused. Limiting the proliferation of technology based upon the "possibility" of abuse in the face of no compelling evidence thereof is ludicrous, and smacks very strongly of the logic used by the anti-gun establishment in advocating more stringent proactive firearms restrictions.
2. While there may indeed be possibilities, nobody has been able to offer an example of any potential new misuse of this system beyond some permutation of "they will know what you are doing". On the other hand, it will likely be a tremendous benefit to law enforcement in combatting criminal behavior, and will potentially save the community an incalculable amount of money.
3. The levels of government that will either ask your permission to use this system, or disclose or acknowledge it at all, do not function at the level where they are using it to provide "security" or en masse surveillance, etc. They are using it for the purposes they say they are; car theft recovery. If the DHS et al feel the need to put this system into operation, they will not bother consulting you about it friend, and it will not be the subject of a town hall meeting with your city council members and chief of police.
4. If and when the time comes that your liberty is threatened by legitimate entities to the extent that you need to concern yourself with the technology employed by law enforcement, you will need to concern yourself with matters a great deal more serious than license plate scanners. Are you prepared to begin advocating the disarmament of your local PD also? Because when they come to arrest you they are going to be using the technology afforded them through the genius of John Browning and Gaston Glock as well.
I didn't say that law-abiding citizens have no reason to worry. I said that I don't understand what specific purpose the license plate recognition system will serve in subjugating the liberty of the masses that the manual system already in place does not.
Sorry we're letting you down. Good to know however that there are still some strong-willed geniuses who don't mind losing their possesions... I guess?
Deavis
Member
Just because you can't think of anything nefarious to use such a system for doesn't mean other people can't. If you provide a means of control, someone will use it for that purpose. Tracking and identification is control, make no mistake about it. It's okay, your lack of ideas is a positive thing, keep it that way, but don't be so shocked when other people realize the broader implications of what you find innocent.
Let's start simple, something "legal"... Imagine the tax implication of being able to tell where someone drives all day long and where they drive. Do some reading on that very topic and see what you turn up. We can always go downhill from there.
BTW, went through the border crossing from Deutschland to Polska to Czech today. Polish stop's camera picked up the plate and pulled up all my car info on a computer in the background. Saw it over the agent's shoulder on a computer he wasnt's using. All for 1km through Poland
I'm Joe Schmuckatelli. My buddy is a cop, I slip him twenty along with your license plate number.
He runs a search on your license plate number from Mar 1 to Apr 1.
Your license plate was spotted every day at Elementary School 'A' and Primary School 'PS12'.
Four times in that 30 day period, your plate was photographed outside of First National Bank, but the plate also shows up at the FNB ATM at the corner of Main and Broad once to twice a day.
Several times that month your license plate in the parking lot of El Chico's restaurant -- the one on Skyway, never the one on Fifth.
Most week days, your car spends most of it's time in the parking lot of Dewey, Cheatum and Howe, but on four occasions during that month, it was spotted in the employee parking lot of the Southwest Critical Care Center.
Okay.
Where do your kids go to school?
Where do you bank?
If you need extra cash, which ATM do you habitually use?
During your lunch hour, out of the 300 restaurants in town, which one would you be most likely found in?
Are you most likely employed by Dewey, Cheatum and Howe, or the Southwest Critical Care Center?
Is it your wife who works at Southwest, or another family member?
Shall we run a search pattern on your plate for a year?
How about we get really funky, wait for the system to get well-and-truly entrenched, then run all vehicles associated with your name for ten years.
With ten years of data to look at I'll know more about you, your wants and your secrets than you will.
And that doesn't include the guessing.
Let's say: Your car has been within 500 meters of House 'A' 14 times over the past month. House 'A' was raided for meth this morning. You're on suspension until you explain just why you needed to be at a dope house 14 time last month. No proof that you're a dope fiend, but better safe than sorry, right?
Your car was near elementary schools 3 times in the past month, two daycare centers and your car was within 300 feet of two parks where children play.
You have no children.
We'll just label you as a "Possible" paedophile until you explain yourself. No, it's not fair, but it's "For the children", right?
Let's say we live in Lost Angels, Notfornia. The local politicians don't like guns -- even though guns are legal (for now). The local politicians have been trying to ram through a gun registration law, and they can't get it done.
Goodness.
Let us be helpful. The last gunshow was at the Hugebloodygigantorium in the downtown area on May 6.
So ... we sit at the computer desk, we input the address for the Hugebloodygigantorium in the 'Search' parameters, along with a date of May 6.
Since there's always at least one cop car at every gun show ... Bingo! A list of probable gun owners!
How much do you think a health insurance company would pay to run the address of a tobacco store for a month? A year?
The same thing for liquor stores, only for MADD?
LawDog
K3
Member
Well CFriesen, you still don't see it.
If your willing to let the .gov fill its toolbox one tool at a time because you don't see a problem with a specific tool, more power to you.
I believe you are missing the forest for the trees.
Edit: Like Clayton Williams said in his failed Texas Gubernatorial bid, 'If rape is inevitable, you may as well sit back and enjoy it'. Your comments sound a lot like this. Especially points 3 and 4.
If your willing to let the .gov fill its toolbox one tool at a time because you don't see a problem with a specific tool, more power to you.
I believe you are missing the forest for the trees.
Edit: Like Clayton Williams said in his failed Texas Gubernatorial bid, 'If rape is inevitable, you may as well sit back and enjoy it'. Your comments sound a lot like this. Especially points 3 and 4.
Big Brother Paranoia
Law Dog...Are you the attorney that sells hot Dogs and gives free advice in Van Nuys? You get what you pay for.
You should use your imagination to write books. Great premise. Not likely to happen however.
I agree with CFriesen:
1. Any technology, including your firearms, can be abused and misused.
2. While there may indeed be possibilities, nobody has been able to offer an example of any potential new misuse of this system beyond some permutation of "they will know what you are doing".
3. The levels of government that will either ask your permission to use this system, or disclose or acknowledge it at all, do not function at the level where they are using it to provide "security" or en masse surveillance, etc.
4. If and when the time comes that your liberty is threatened by legitimate entities to the extent that you need to concern yourself with the technology employed by law enforcement...
"Paranoia may destroy ya"...Mick Jager Rolling Stones
Law Dog...Are you the attorney that sells hot Dogs and gives free advice in Van Nuys? You get what you pay for.
You should use your imagination to write books. Great premise. Not likely to happen however.
I agree with CFriesen:
1. Any technology, including your firearms, can be abused and misused.
2. While there may indeed be possibilities, nobody has been able to offer an example of any potential new misuse of this system beyond some permutation of "they will know what you are doing".
3. The levels of government that will either ask your permission to use this system, or disclose or acknowledge it at all, do not function at the level where they are using it to provide "security" or en masse surveillance, etc.
4. If and when the time comes that your liberty is threatened by legitimate entities to the extent that you need to concern yourself with the technology employed by law enforcement...
"Paranoia may destroy ya"...Mick Jager Rolling Stones
I'm unfortunately not shocked that people are scared of things they are unable to articulate. Call it dismay.
I am unable to make the connection between law enforcement and the tax benefits of knowing American citizens' driving behavior... sorry. You are undoubtedly considerably more inteligent or informed than I am.
Wow... that's just insane isn't it? I mean really... having to subject yourself to being identified by foreign governments when entering their country? Lord knows we wouldn't want our border agents having that ability here in America would we?
SniperStraz
Member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2006
- Messages
- 871
I got nothin to hide, you can take pictures of my plates anytime.
Ummm Lawdog... the license plate recognition system is a non-specific and "mobile" platform... not a stationary surveillance camera.
Even if some agency were to authorize it's use as a "database" surveillance system, it would only locate your vehicle en route to where it was going at the point that it happened to pass it. You would only be able to determine a vehicles presence at a specific location if the cruiser happened to be there at precisely the same time. And what if it just happened to be a bank, school, etc that was on the route to the bank, school, etc that was the ultimate destination? Surveillance requires a continuum of contact Lawdog, not moments in time. As a "tracking tool" this system is worthless.
You wouldn't be able to pinpoint jack squat from that database other than the fact that a system equipped cruiser and the subject vehicle were in the same place at the same time.
The only way you could ascertain specific information is if you assigned that cruiser to tail the subject vehicle... which you can do right now, and which would negate the purpose of the system. I'm not sure if you've noticed it or not, but if you live in a populated area, you drive past dozens of banks, schools, etc each day. After 10 days or "10 years" of surveillance, that database will have your vehicle in regular direct proximity to every bank, school, and barbeque joint in town.
And then what? What do they do with the list? Seems to me that that list would actually be more helpful to the NRA or the California gun lobby under the circumstances.
No more than what it would cost to set up a private security company to conduct that surveillance right now.
As a LEO, what do you think a police agency would charge to provide that service Lawog???
Last edited:
thexrayboy
Member
No one will drown, any high end mainframe computer with a decent program can sift through mountains of this type of data in the blink of an eye. And it can provide specific answers to specific questions along with statistical tracking data to cover virtually any scenario the questioner can think of.
Quite right, give them an inch they will take a mile. The time to stop BIG Brother and the Police State is now. If we wait till they have all these little incremental technologies in place it will be too late to stop. Once all these
are combined into one overwhelming enforcement mechanism anyone who protests will be dealt with. How.... Somewhere in that mountain of data collected on everybody is information that can be used to create a criminal charge. With so many laws on the books at so many levels of government it
is virtually impossible for anyone to go about their daily life without violating some law somewhere. We will all be held to the spectre of computerized blackmail. Shut up and go along with Big Brother or protest and be visited by the Police State with a warrant generated by Colossus from the Forbin project.
By itself this technology is minimal, however it is 1 more slash in the death by a thousand cuts, 1 more brick in the wall of slavery. Government is not your friend, the police are not your friends. Any technology they design, create or acquire has one purpose. Too make it easier and more efficient for them to track people and their activities in order to enforce laws. Good laws, bad laws, unconstitutional laws. It serves the police, not the citizens. And if you think the police can be trusted.......read this.
http://wcbstv.com/investigates/local_story_256202241.html
Well now understand a couple of things:
I hate invasive and specious government regulation more than most people. However I also dislike reactive, uninformed, and accusatory posturing toward the persons that make it their business to protect the safety of our community each and every day. Yeah, there are some bad seeds out there... but by and large these people, and the agencies that they work for, are doing exactly what they are sworn to.
I am an open minded kind of guy. I am more than willing to accept your assertions as soon as you are able to articulate a compelling demonstration of their validity. Back up what you are saying and I will adopt your position quite happily. Right now your argument is based purely upon rhetoric.
K3
Member
Yeah, you're 100% right. There is no such thing as Big Brother, and even if there were, only a few bad apples would abuse the system. The system itself isn't a problem. Couldn't possibly be. Why should I give concrete examples to make you happy? If I was able to, then that would mean that things have gotten too far. Best to prevent them from getting there in the first place.
I'm obviously not a cop, any I don't care to make their jobs easier at the expense of liberties. Cops get things done just fine. If you really want to make things easier on the police, lock up a-holes for real sentences. Throw the key away.
Like I said earlier, even though most Americans are law-abiding in spirit, how often does a BS law get passed that creates a whole new subset of felons? Felons only because they possess an item that some do not want them to have. With 4473s, CHL permits, driver's licenses, etc. ad nauseum, there is already plenty of oversight.
You call it paranoid. I call it being watchful.
Also, I appreciate those officers that really do make it their business to protect the community. My lead foot has caused me to meet quite a few of them. Without exception they have been polite, even when writing that expensive ticket that I earned. That said, the function of law enforcement, especially on the federal level (most especially the BATFE), is to protect government. When dealing wih LEOs, even if I am the one in need, I always keep the proverbial hand on the wallet.
You may think that the US is different than other nations, and if we are talking matters of degree, then I'd be inclined to agree. But make no mistake, government by its very nature is prone to subjugation of the citizenry. Until humans stop being, well, human, this will not change.
I'm obviously not a cop, any I don't care to make their jobs easier at the expense of liberties. Cops get things done just fine. If you really want to make things easier on the police, lock up a-holes for real sentences. Throw the key away.
Like I said earlier, even though most Americans are law-abiding in spirit, how often does a BS law get passed that creates a whole new subset of felons? Felons only because they possess an item that some do not want them to have. With 4473s, CHL permits, driver's licenses, etc. ad nauseum, there is already plenty of oversight.
You call it paranoid. I call it being watchful.
Also, I appreciate those officers that really do make it their business to protect the community. My lead foot has caused me to meet quite a few of them. Without exception they have been polite, even when writing that expensive ticket that I earned.
That said, the function of law enforcement, especially on the federal level (most especially the BATFE), is to protect government. When dealing wih LEOs, even if I am the one in need, I always keep the proverbial hand on the wallet. You may think that the US is different than other nations, and if we are talking matters of degree, then I'd be inclined to agree. But make no mistake, government by its very nature is prone to subjugation of the citizenry. Until humans stop being, well, human, this will not change.
Regardless of whether there is or isn't a problem or a "Big Brother", your argument that there is would be aided greatly be some evidentiary demonstration of the actual problem as you see it.
You absolutely do not need to. But when you make assertions of misconduct by people who pride themselves in upholding the law and the constitution and protecting YOUR personal safety and that of YOUR loved ones... well, it would be generous of you to offer a crumb of support to your position.
The same argument used against the availability of military-style weapons to the general public; "Misuse could happen... stop it before it does".
Oh yeah... and we filled the prisons with them didn't we?
I'm not calling you paranoid. I'm suggesting that you are buying into the same flawed and specious mode of thinking that drives people to restrict gun ownership to law abiding citizens in order to prevent the "possibility" of misuse. It's not paranoia... it's fear as a derivative of ignorance (with all due respect).
I'm going to submit to you that there are more than a few federal LEO's that might disagree with you friend. You are entitled to your opinions... regardless of how you choose to arrive at them.
Friend, I was not born in this fine country... I am here by choice. I fully and intimately appreciate the ability of government to subjugate; particularly its' ability to subjugate where gun-rights are concerned. I understand this much better than most American-born citizens do, having actually been personally placed in the position of having to register and surrender weapons to the government. Thanks... but I do not need a lesson in this regard.
bogie
Member
Just what does this have to do with firearms or the 2nd amendment?
pcosmar
member
CFriesen
"I'm unfortunately not shocked that people are scared of things they are unable to articulate. Call it dismay."
It would seem to me that you trust the government.
There is good reason to mistrust the government. And there is documented proof.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study
how about Agenda 21,and the North American Union, The list goes on.
This is being sold as crime prevention. this is really about control.
Add it in as a piece of a much larger puzzle.
"I'm unfortunately not shocked that people are scared of things they are unable to articulate. Call it dismay."
It would seem to me that you trust the government.
There is good reason to mistrust the government. And there is documented proof.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_MKULTRA
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_Syphilis_Study
how about Agenda 21,and the North American Union, The list goes on.
This is being sold as crime prevention. this is really about control.
Add it in as a piece of a much larger puzzle.
Well... if you read the last paragraph of my last post you might see that I do not in fact have implicit trust in government any more than anyone else does. And I have personal reason. It is not in any way hypothetical to me.
I do not however believe in crippling the systems of order in our society through the indulgence of illogical, uninformed, and irresponsible advocacy movements that have no demonstrable basis in fact.
I do not believe in offering universal and absolutist statements or accusations which offend or insult the predominantly honest and honorable sworn officers and agencies dedicated to protecting our communities without cause, evidence, or provocation.
Go about your life as you will. Live as a fugitive if you feel it is right for you. Spend your existence fighting "government control"... it is certainly your perogative to do so.
But let me tell you something; so long as you live a predominantly peaceful and law-abiding existence, no one really gives a hoot about controlling you or anyone else. Certainly not a bunch of street cops who have a lot more pressing things to do with their day then track what you decide to do with your afternoon.
- Status
