National Car Tracking System Proposed For US

bl968 writes "The Newspaper is reporting that the leading private traffic enforcement camera vendors are seeking to establish a national vehicle tracking system in the United States using existing red-light and speed enforcement cameras. The system would utilize Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) to track vehicles passing surveillance cameras operated by these companies. If there are cameras positioned correctly the company will enable images and video to be taken of the driver and passengers. The nice thing in their view is that absolutely no warrants are needed. To gain public acceptance, the surveillance program is being initially sold as an aid for police looking to solve Amber Alert cases and locate stolen cars."

Comments

Why Am I Not Surprised

[FSWKU]

Why does it come as absolutely no surprise that they will sell a way to track your movements with "think of the children"?

Re:Why Am I Not Surprised

[kadehje]

And why am I not surprised when the public buys the "think of the children" pitch hook, line and sinker; when previous measures passed on this logic have done little to anything to address the problems they've supposed to have fixed while at the same time introducing new issues?

If only people would seriously think of the children when they consider legislation that would sacrifice liberties: what kind of society do you want to leave to you're children after you're gone? Already I hear parents reminiscing about a time when they could play pickup baseball or hang out by the lake until well after sunset without a care in the world. Even though the activities may be different (e.g. playing Madden 2008 instead of touch football on the street), why can't children today get to enjoy the broad freedom to play that their parents enjoyed? And more directly on this topic, a generation who grew up with a rite of passage of driving around with friends and boyfriends/girlfriends at 16 years (and younger in certain areas) is increasingly pushing to raise the driving age to 18. The hazards of our society haven't changed that dramatically in the past 40 years; on average in the U.S. violent crime rates are signifcantly lower than they were in the early 1970s, a time considered to be the "good old days" by many Baby Boomer parents. Child abduction and pedophila have existed for much longer than the past few decades, and I'm curious to see whether there's really been an increase in incidence of these problems or just an increase of coverage of them.

While some measures like educating children about not getting into a car with strangers and our present Amber Alert system are good, imposing a surveillance society does little to improve actual safety from the ostensible hazards that prompt such measures and at the same time creates new hazards of abuse by government and corporations.

It amazes me that so many a generation that grew up in a time where the defeat of Nazism and fascism were fresh in our collective minds (their parents experienced World War II firsthand) and our freedoms were cherished as our distinguishing feature from totalitarian Communism can turn its back on the values they were raised with and build an increasingly restrictive society for their children. The same holds true of our fiscal values; a generation raised on thrift is now building an unimaginable amount of public and private debt to leave to their heirs.

While not every Baby Boomer is guilty of this type of convenient thinking, apparrently there are enough who do to cause these measures to take effect. When someone says to you "think of the children," you really should think of the next generation. If I ever have children, I'll accept a 1-in-1000 (probably even lower, though I'm too lazy to look it up) chance that they'll be abused by a teacher, priest or any other adult over a much higher chance of being abused by a know-it-all government any day of the week. And even if I don't have my own children, I'll have nieces and nephews and friends' kids to think about.

DHS' real agenda

[megamerican]

Now the agenda of the DHS should be clear for everyone. It isn't about catching terrorists, its about tracking every citizen. Most of their money goes to putting up cameras in cities across the US, big and small and putting up "fusion" centers which track everything.

Call me crazy or whatever you want. It isn't hard to verify everything I said via google.

Re:DHS' real agenda

[scorp1us]

When you have an oppressive government, every citizen is a potential terrorist.

I can only explain it as such: The government expects some massive revolt soon, and it needs to be able to target any organizing into a power structure. Being that roads will be used to get to targets, they need to identify the people they need to watch and see them coming.

As for why, I have to say it is economic collapse. There is no way we can continue to bail out these banks, have "world police actions", and fund national health care. In true political fashion they will deny it to the last, then spin it. Then when we actually have to know the truth, the ruling party (the rich) will have already adjusted leaving the rest of us with no recourse but to get their heads on a stick... If there is any accountability at all.

I cannot see any good times ahead for the US. The people I work with and I agree this is the beginning of the decline of the US to a living standard more on par with the rest of the world. But hey, at least we'll have universal health care and/or cheap oil.

Re:Inductive sensors

[riker1384]

How would it tell my Civic from the millions of other Civics?

Re:I'm all for it

[Ethanol-fueled]

"To gain public acceptance, the surveillance program is being initially sold as an aid for police looking to solve Amber Alert cases and locate stolen cars."

Here in california we already have the Amber alert system tied into those highway warning signs and I see about 1 Amber alert every month or two. What percentage of cars on the streets are stolen? Not a whole hell of a lot either way, so we're going to rape everybody's privacy and invite abuse of sweeping power just for anomalies? It's not like this database will prevent a nuclear attack!

Here's an obligatory horror story from TFA:

In the past, police databases have been used to intimidate innocent motorists. An Edmonton, Canada police sergeant, for example, found himself outraged after he read columnist Kerry Diotte criticize his city's photo radar operation in the Edmonton Sun newspaper. The sergeant looked up Diotte's personal information, and, without the assistance of electronic scanners, ordered his subordinates to "be on the lookout" for Diotte's BMW. Eventually a team of officers followed Diotte to a local bar where they hoped to trap the journalist and accuse him of driving under the influence of alcohol. Diotte took a cab home and the officers' plan was exposed after tapes of radio traffic were leaked to the press. Police later cleared themselves of any serious wrong-doing following an extensive investigation.

I'm going to build motorized, retractable cover for my front license plate if this system is implimented. Fuck that.

How handy!

[Rob T Firefly]

TFA:

Police later cleared themselves of any serious wrong-doing following an extensive investigation.

I just love this quote so much, for so many reasons.

One layer of indirection

[Harmonious Botch]

When my wife and I were in another state, we were using her car, I was driving, and I got photographed running a red light. They sent a citation to my wife, complete with a copy of the photo clearly showing me driving. They demanded that she either pay or give the name and address of the person who was driving. My wife - who is a lawyer - told them that that her husband was driving, and then refused to give name or address. She informed them that is is a protected relationship, that is, you cannot be compelled to testify against your spouse. They gave up on it.

So register your car under your wife's name, and hers under your name. Don't have a wife? Pay your attourney to register it for you. Attourney/client relationship is privleged also.

Re:One layer of indirection

[Remus Shepherd]

This sounds like a great idea, except for one thing. You DID break the law. You SHOULD have paid the fine.

I'm all in favor of finding ways around the surveillance state. But I wish there were ways for lawful citizens to avoid surveillance that did not also allow criminals to get away.

And I'll note that we have such omnipresent surveillance because of criminals like you that slip between the cracks. If people would own up and take responsibility for their bad behavior (or, ya know, not behave badly in the first place) then the state might be less inclined to monitor everyone, all the time.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[Whatsisname]

"You do not examine legislation in light of the benefits it will convey if properly administered, but in light of the wrongs it would do and the harms it would cause if improperly administered." -- Lyndon B. Johnson

Seriously, how do these people live with themselves, knowing what they are doing.

Re:public space

[hacker]

It is public, until all of that data is aggregated in some unknown and unavailable-to-the-general-public database.

Do you mind having someone email you a turn-by-turn itinerary for every single place you went, how fast you drove, where you stopped, how long you stopped, and so on... from your front door in the morning until you come home at night, in your email every day? Do you have any major problem with that?

This isn't about "seeing" you in public, it's about TRACKING your movements in public. Run that through some beta software to track "suspicious" activity, or appear in more than one place that a "known terrorist" was seen (fast food joint and then the carwash? Now you're a "person of interest").

The implications of this are so massive it is unbelievable.

Re:It should be

[roman_mir]

They don' really want to enforce laws.

Commercial entities want to create a business opportunity selling and maintaining these systems with possibility of further extension of the technology to other aspects of life.

The Government wants to keep track of its citizens, because the Government is scared of its citizens. The government also wants to justify taking more taxes from its citizens to buy these expensive technologies and to create new forms of government for regulation of such tech and the new laws that will come with it.

Nobody cares about 'enforcing laws' and besides, if they wanted to enforce laws they should have started with enforcing of the Constitution first.

Think of the income^Wtickets

[RichMan]

Your car was determined to be at point 1 at time alpha and point 2 at time beta. 1 and 2 or the same road with a speed limit.

(D2-D1)/(beta-alpha) - speed_limit = excess_speed

As the owner of the automobile this ticket has been sent to you under law HTA2009-01 and you are responsible for payment. A picture from point beta is attached for your reference should you not have been driving at the time you can contact the driver and make arrangements for them to reimburse them for your expense.

Note of this excess speed has been forwarded to your insurance company. Should the automated face recognition software have matched the photo against your drivers license you will also have been assigned appropriate demerits.

If an extreme hazard was detected in the amount of observed speed we trust that an officer has already contacted you about this issue.

We can put this on Scottsdale, Arizona and greed

[bjdevil66]

About 60-70% of AZ residents are welcoming the highway speed cameras with open arms - thanks to Governor Napolitano whoring the state out to Redflex to balance her budget. (The tickets taken by the cameras will not count against insurance points - it's only a fine. Once you pay your "tax", it's forgotten.

If you speak out against the system, you're branded a speeder, GTA wannabe, and told to, "Just slow DOWN!", or, "Stop breaking the law!" They don't get that it's all about money (and now outright spying).

Hell, even if the people rose up against the system and stopped this tracking, what's to stop the NSA from doing it under the table with the same system, all in the name of safety?

I single-handedly hold Scottsdale, Arizona and its town council for bringing this system to the entire nation. If they'd had their heads pulled out and not put the system up on the Loop 101, it wouldn't have gained any traction to go state-wide, and now nationwide. Thanks, guys... I hope you enjoyed that paltry revenue stream while introducing Big Brother to us. Damn, I hate Scottsdale more than ever now...

It looks like the tin foil crowd got this system 100% right, and the sad thing is that nobody will be educated enough about what's going on to care.

Re:I'm all for it

[mcsqueak]

Not a whole hell of a lot either way, so we're going to rape everybody's privacy and invite abuse of sweeping power just for anomalies?

That has been the justification behind every major piece of "security theater" installed since 9/11. Some sort of random, one-off attack happens and you have this momentous knee-jerk reaction as entire industries are created or transformed in order top deal with this "new grave danger".

Just look at all the hassle we have to go through at the airports because some British nutjob tried to blow up a home-made shoe bomb. Or all the 3 oz container rules because of some rumor that you could assemble a chemical bomb from component parts in an airliner's lavatory.

I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but with all of the lobbying that goes on at the state and federal level, combined with what companies are able to get away with these days, it's not surprising our liberties are given away for new, lucrative profit creating endeavors.

heuristics

[seanadams.com]

How would it tell my Civic from the millions of other Civics?

Obviously the system would have a degree of certainty that is dependent on the number of cars on the road, the uniqueness of the car in question, the number of sensors, etc.

The key premise is that cars don't just randomly appear and disappear from the road. They pass over sensors in a predictable sequence. You would use all kinds of heuristics. For example, you might predict when a given car should pass the next sensor, and then if you see that same signature at around the expected time, you can be pretty sure it was the same car. Correlate that with additional data about the cars nearby it and you can increase the degree of certainty. It's not simple, but it's feasible.

Re:I'm all for it

[mcgrew]

What percentage of cars on the streets are stolen? Not a whole hell of a lot either way

More importantly, what percentage of stolen cars are recovered without this Orwellian nonsense? I've had two cars stolen, One back in 1975 when I left the keys on a coffee table at a friend's house and his teenaged daughter and her friends decided to run away, and took my keys, and the one I'm driving now (It's chronicled in the NSFW sm62704 journals somewhere; again, the keys were stolen).

In both cases the cars were recovered in a matter of hours. If a professional steals your car it won't be recovered at all; it will be in a chop shop in a matter of minutes. Cameras won't help in that case, as the pros use the newer flatbed tow trucks and will simply cover the automobile.

In an Amber Alert, what percentage of child kidnappings do the police know the make and model, let alone license plate number?

There's a sig somewhere at slashdot that says "Orwell was an optimist".

Re:I'm all for it

[cgenman]

California Child deaths by cause.
Cause Number of Deaths Mortality Rate
        Natural 3,923
                  Perinatal Conditions 1,508
                  Congenital Anomalies 836
                  Neoplasms 322
                  Respiratory Disease 157
                  Circulatory Disease 146
                  Nervous System Disease 183
                  SIDS 153
        Unintentional Injury 1,149
                  Motor Vehicle 746
                  Drowning 134
                  Fire/Burn 20
                  Poisoning 44
                  Suffocation/Strangulation 73
                  Firearm 25
        Homicide 508
                  Firearm 395
        Suicide 155
                  Firearm 54
                  Suffocation/Strangulation 75
                  Poisoning 8

Comparatively: Number of Amber Alerts in California 2003 - 24. Role of Amber Alerts in recovering those children - Questionable.

In terms of children-saved-per-dollar, we could be doing a lot more for children by educating and enforcing laws about swimming pool fences, or cleaning the air in our major cities. Or, for that matter, getting drivers to pay attention to the road and stop running over the kids.

Re:RFID

[Budgreen]

you mean like the mandatory tire pressure sensor ones that uniquely ID your car?

Re:Inductive sensors

[Moofie]

Over time? All of them.