of August, Florida's Department of Transportation ordered the removal of automated license plate readers from state road "rights-of-way."
Several Florida counties and cities have since followed suit. The growing popular movement against "Flock cameras" (the most popular ALPRs are made by Flock Safety) enjoys nationwide reach and politicians have begun running to the head of that parade.
That's a good thing.
No, not just because ALPRs can be easily abused (more than 100 police officers have been caught using ALPR data to do things like stalk former or prospective romantic partners).
And no, not just because ALPRs can deliver inaccurate information, resulting in frightening traffic stops and sometimes false arrests.
The biggest reason to oppose use of ALPRs is that they create an ongoing, persistent, nationwide web of warrantless search and surveillance that encompasses everyone who drives, without probable cause to believe that those drivers have committed particular crimes or even that those particular crimes have actually occurred. That's something the government isn't supposed to be able to do.
It's also something the government doesn't NEED to do.
The number of privately owned and operated security cameras in America is staggering.
According to SafeHome.org, about 75 million US homes operate security cameras. While some of those cameras are positioned indoors, most of them aren't -- nearly 60 million are video doorbell cameras, most of which can see the street frontages of the homes using them.
That number doesn't include the ubiquitous security cameras found scattered around nearly every American business establishment.
It also doesn't include similar cameras on pretty much every government building.
When a crime is committed, police are fully empowered to request -- or, if necessary, get warrants to seize -- the footage from any cameras that might plausibly have recorded the crime or the perpetrators' actions leading up to and away from the crime scene.
Would government officials and police officers LIKE to have 24/7/365 access to information on everyone's coming and goings, everywhere? Well, of course they (or at least many of them) would.
In fact, some of them wouldn't mind having access to "security cameras" inside your home, pointed at you, so that if you murder your spouse -- or perhaps just smoke, snort, or inject an unapproved substance, or casually mention that you broke the speed limit coming home -- an alert and AI analysis pops up on the relevant detective's computer screen and he drops by to haul you off at his convenience, with irrefutable evidence already in hand.
The rest of us, however, are entitled to a presumption of innocence and to substantial protections from the snoopy predilections of government officials and police officers. In theory, at least, THEY work for US. Most of us like our privacy, and few of us want rogue cops spying on us 24/7.
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
