Slashdot Mirror
ICE License-Plate Tracking Plan Withdrawn Amid Outcry About Privacy
An anonymous reader writes "Homeland security officials on Wednesday abruptly shelved a proposal to build a national database of license-plate scans after criticism from privacy advocates. The proposal, which had been posted online last week by the office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, sought a contractor who could establish a searchable database of license plates, with the times and locations where they were spotted by traffic cameras and other sources. But in a statement late Wednesday, the department announced a reversal. 'The solicitation, which was posted without the awareness of ICE leadership, has been canceled,' said spokeswoman Gillian Christensen. 'While we continue to support a range of technologies to help meet our law enforcement mission, this solicitation will be reviewed to ensure the path forward appropriately meets our operational needs.'"
And as such, your expectation of privacy on public roadways should be zero. Legally, I'm pretty sure if they wanted to push this issue there is nothing wrong with it.
Yeah right, withdrawn. To be resubmitted covertly as something else, hopefully covered by "national security". Go on, celebrate your "victory".
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
That way no one will get upset when we hire a company to magically receive license plate information from all the various authorities and deliver that data to us. Everyone wins!
OLD ARTICLE but it still RINGS TRUE today!
Perspective: Inside Cisco's eavesdropping apparatus
April 21, 2003 4:00 AM PDT
http://news.cnet.com/2010-1071...
By Declan McCullagh
"Cisco Systems has created a more efficient and targeted way for police and intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on people whose Internet service provider uses their company's routers.
The company recently published a proposal that describes how it plans to embed "lawful interception" capability into its products. Among the highlights: Eavesdropping "must be undetectable," and multiple police agencies conducting simultaneous wiretaps must not learn of one another. If an Internet provider uses encryption to preserve its customers' privacy and has access to the encryption keys, it must turn over the intercepted communications to police in a descrambled form.
Cisco's decision to begin offering "lawful interception" capability as an option to its customers could turn out to be either good or bad news for privacy.
Because Cisco's routers currently aren't designed to target an individual, it's easy for an Internet service provider (ISP) to comply with a police request today by turning over all the traffic that flows through a router or switch. Cisco's "lawful interception" capability thus might help limit the amount of data that gets scooped up in the process.
On the other hand, the argument that it hinders privacy goes like this: By making wiretapping more efficient, Cisco will permit governments in other countries--where court oversight of police eavesdropping is even more limited than in the United States--snoop on far more communications than they could have otherwise.
Marc Rotenberg, head of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, says: "I don't see why the technical community should hardwire surveillance standards and not also hardwire accountability standards like audit logs and public reporting. The laws that permit 'lawful interception' typically incorporate both components--the (interception) authority and the means of oversight--but the (Cisco) implementation seems to have only the surveillance component. That is no guarantee that the authority will be used in a 'lawful' manner."
U.S. history provides many examples of government and police agencies conducting illegal wiretaps. The FBI unlawfully spied on Eleanor Roosevelt, Martin Luther King Jr., feminists, gay rights leaders and Catholic priests. During its dark days, the bureau used secret files and hidden microphones to blackmail the Kennedy brothers, sway the Supreme Court and influence presidential elections. Cisco's Internet draft may be titled "lawful interception," but there's no guarantee that the capability will always be used legally.
Still, if you don't like Cisco's decision, remember that they're not the ones doing the snooping. Cisco is responding to its customers' requests, and if they don't, other hardware vendors will.
Cisco's Internet draft may be titled "lawful interception," but there's no guarantee that the capability will always be used legally.
If you're looking for someone to blame, consider Attorney General John Ashcroft, who asked for and received sweeping surveillance powers in the USA Patriot Act, along with your elected representatives in Congress, who gave those powers to him with virtually no debate.
I talked with Fred Baker, a Cisco fellow and former chairman of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), about his work on the "lawful interception" draft.
Q: Why did Cisco decide to build "lawful interception" into its products? What prompted this?
Privately Continued.
NSA contacted them and said "Don't do that, we already did, all you are doing is stirring up negative controversy with that talk."
"Here's the URL and the credentials, have fun!
Many municipalities already have vehicles equipped with ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) equipment. Also, all toll roads (aka EZ pass) have databases of individual cars passing these roads. The logical step was to put everything to one database and to put a plate number scanning camera on every road. Currently DHS analysts have access to each and every database in the country and their problem is that they have to keep too many passwords and analysis is cumbersome. To overcome that very soon you will hear oh so well predictable story about left or right militia disgruntled member in some sort of terrorism attempt who was known to law enforcement, but because east coast database was not "talking" to the west coast database he was not caught in a timely manner. Mr Clapper stated eloquently that "they had to be upfront about mass surveilance". He is right if you want to do something unconstitutional you have to do it openly, and they tried to do it.
As if the privacy implications and police overreach weren't bad enough, I have been feeling more and more frustrated over the financial aspect of programs like these. Who decided that this program was good or desirable in the first place? We've been getting along fine for a long time now without a national database of license-plate scans.
The same can be said for many other surveillance and technology initiatives by police and government agencies. These programs cost vast amounts of money which could be used for cancer research, or schools, or bridge repairs, or space exploration, or countless other positive things. Alternatively, just give the money back to the taxpayers and let them put it to good use. I'm pretty sure that only a tiny percentage of people would volunteer to fund programs like these out of their own pockets.
If one thing the Edward Snowden releases have shown, is if the authorities are telling you they plan to do something, they are probably already doing it.
Take Nobody's Word For It.
I caught an unmarked "police" car methodically casing our office complex parking lot. I happed to walk right by as he entered a dead end area of our parking lot. He had a laptop and there were four rectangle boxes mounted on the trunk with lenses pointing outward. Our security group confirmed from videos that they cased our lot as well as nearby businesses. So, at what point is this trespassing? We didn't invite law enforcement on to our lot to collect data. We now know it was the local police department and they've since added these readers to several marked vehicles and have stationed them alongside roadways collecting data. They've recently been sued over refusal to release information under state sunshine laws but I doubt that will stop them. We now have several police departments in the metro area using this. What next? Will they be installed on stop lights right next to the red light cameras?
the leafers have opted to have alanis morrissette appointed temporary custodian of citizen defense (from the zionoc crown royals) policies
Day 1: It wouldn't stop, the redirecting. At first I thought it was malware. Had my first drink in a long time.
Day 2: Barely had the strength to carry on as the BETA REDIRECTIONS continue.. trying not to talk to hallucinations at the bar and in the bathroom which laugh at me about these redirections.
Day 3: Discovered the BETA redirections were random, and while at first they looked somewhat usable, when I looked at me and my monitor screen in the mirror, a horrible woman with flesh hanging off of her body looked back, trying to lead me into a dance as the word BETA appeared across her rancid breasts.
Day 4: These BETA corridors go on FOREVER! On the plus side, I've taken up disassembling vehicles to corner this BETA beast and sacrifice myself rather than lead others to discovering it. I ate some red snow.
Day 5: Finding it harder to concentrate. I've ate some more of the red snow. The taste is starting to grow on me.
Day 6: This typewriter is the only entertainment I have, apart from throwing things at the walls, trying to get some response from the BETA which is now taking over my mind.
Day 7: Hahahahahha! Would you believe it? I'M STILL BEING REDIRECTED TO SLASHDOT BETA PAGES! AHAHhahahaah! Type, type, ding, ding! Wooo!
Day 8: The hallucinations are actually real! Would you believe it? They have offered to help me if I agree to work for them. I'm thinking about patenting this delicious red snow, the taste is unreal!
Day 9: Having black out sessions where I cannot remember large passings of time. Found some makeup, thought I'd paint a joker smile on my face to amuse the people only I can see!
Day 10: Productive today, part of what I wrote for my new screenplay:
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slashdot BETA!
I cannot opt out of Slas
(drops of blood on paper)
As if the privacy implications and police overreach weren't bad enough, I have been feeling more and more frustrated over the financial aspect of programs like these. Who decided that this program was good or desirable in the first place? We've been getting along fine for a long time now without a national database of license-plate scans.
The same can be said for many other surveillance and technology initiatives by police and government agencies. These programs cost vast amounts of money which could be used for cancer research, or schools, or bridge repairs, or space exploration, or countless other positive things. Alternatively, just give the money back to the taxpayers and let them put it to good use. I'm pretty sure that only a tiny percentage of people would volunteer to fund programs like these out of their own pockets.
A program like this is relatively cheap and easy. I would expect it is already in place on a smaller level in a lot of municipalities (and certainly in DC). ICE probably withdrew it because they were afraid, in the current climate, that a legal challenge might (barely) succeed and threaten all of those prorams.
The benefits to the program are also substantial--it gives you a lot of information for law enforcement *and* for anti-terrorism. They can use that to investigate crimes (who was in area X) (if you said your alibi was Y, why were you driving the other way?). If your goal is to prevent crime and to make investigation in the aftermath of an attack easier, you want this.
It does, obviously, come at a privacy cost. But realistically, we're already living with it, and they're not going to stop unless a court orders them to--which is somewhat unlikely.
Citizens group officials on Wednesday abruptly shelved a proposal to overthrow the federal government after government officials displayed a modicum of sanity. The proposal, which had been posted online last week by irate individuals, sought a contractor who could establish a government of the people, founded upon a belief in certain inalienable rights. But in a statement late Wednesday, the group announced a reversal. 'The solicitation, which was posted without the awareness of group leadership, has been canceled,' said spokeswoman Anonymous Coward. 'While we continue to support a range of activities to help meet our freedom-promoting mission, this solicitation will be reviewed to ensure the path forward appropriately meets our operational needs.'
[Satire] [Please don't arrest and/or extraordinarily render me] [I'd post anonymously but I'm not sure if that's even possible in a post-9/11 world]
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Like anyone would truly believe an underling could solicit such a bid without direction from the ICE leadership.
The bastards are out of control.
-- kjh
I caught an unmarked "police" car methodically casing our office complex parking lot. I happed to walk right by as he entered a dead end area of our parking lot. He had a laptop and there were four rectangle boxes mounted on the trunk with lenses pointing outward. Our security group confirmed from videos that they cased our lot as well as nearby businesses. So, at what point is this trespassing? We didn't invite law enforcement on to our lot to collect data. We now know it was the local police department and they've since added these readers to several marked vehicles and have stationed them alongside roadways collecting data. They've recently been sued over refusal to release information under state sunshine laws but I doubt that will stop them. We now have several police departments in the metro area using this. What next? Will they be installed on stop lights right next to the red light cameras?
1. It usually becomes trespassing if someone with authority asks them to leave and they don't, although it varies based on state law.
2. You can, however, sue them for violating four fourth amendment right to be free from unreasonable search. I don't know that you would win, but if it's a private parking lot, you might.
3. They already use these on the West Side Highway as a pilot program for fully automated tolls. Everyone either has EZ-pass or gets billed through the mail based on their license plate. My guess is they're imaging every license plate on all of the entries to NYC (if not, they certainly will be within a little while).
I could criticize you for posting something like that, but I'm sure you're only following orders.
I didn't know the ICE had licence plates.
Anyway, I'm all for tracking those, if it helps them being more punctual. ... :-)
Then again, you'd expect Deutsche Bahn to know where all their ICEs are at any given time, no?
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
It's a good thing these tools against foreign aggressors
are so effective at protecting our citizenry from itself!
Looks like they're going to have to stick with the v1.0 system they already have for license plate tracking.
What they really shelved was the public acknowledgement of the desire for the program, I doubt they shelved the plans.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Yeah, right. They just figure it's easier to do this clandestinely.
The governement does not own the highway, the public owns the highway in common. The government is nothing more than a steward of the public's property and if the public decides to change that they certainly may. As a matter of fact the public doesn't need the governments consent to change how our highways are managed either; the public can vote and make it happen.
load "$",8,1
I don't know where this "driving is a privilege" nonsense comes from. If "driving is a privilege", why not walking or breathing? They are all activities people engage in while on public lands. Unless there is a compelling public interest, government has no authority to restrict what we do on public lands; there simply is no constitutional basis for it. The restrictions we impose on driving needed to be justified by safety and environmental concerns.
But you're right: you have no expectation of privacy on public roadways. That means any private party can, if they so choose, collect your license plate information and follow you around. But the government is not a private party; it is more restricted in what it can and should be allowed to do. Police can't just follow you around without cause, and they shouldn't be allowed to collect license plate information without cause either.
So just what element is private about a plate openly displayed in public
What's private is the history of where that plate has been - tracking a person's car without a warrant is illegal, per the SCOTUS.
Shit, man, in these days of parallel construction it amazes me I have to respond to questions like this...
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
Why do you hate freedom to that degree? Your arguments have been debunked time and time again.
So, if you don't like having your licensed plate tracked by government, DON'T FUCKING DRIVE. You have no right to drive in the first place.
You have no right to fly on a plane, so rejoice as the TSA thugs molest you.
If the government can violate your rights simply because you choose to participate in some activity that's not strictly necessary and/or is a privilege, you have no rights; you have tyranny.
Thank you Dave Raggett
Slashdot is a US website. Learn to filter the US news bias.
I'm gong to get a new bumper sticker which will read:
4TH AMD"); DROP TABLE PlateScans;
oblig ref
The very purpose of a license plate is to make public the identity of a specific vehicle. Trying to say that govenrment or anyone else can not keep records of where a plate is noticed is absurd.
Bullshit, once again. You government drones need to think for yourselves. It is not absurd to say that while it is possible for people to see you in public places, the government shouldn't be installing surveillance equipment everywhere. The latter is what people want to be free from.
It does not track the owner at all. The tag identifies the car and not the driver.
But it tracks the car, which is bad enough. In my case, it would be more than enough to track me.
Worse yet one doesn't even need a plate unless one uses the vehicle on a public road.
Which nearly everyone does. A moot point.
So just what element is private about a plate openly displayed in public.
The part where we step up and demand that the government not install surveillance equipment in public places, which is a far cry from someone merely seeing you.
If I notice a suspicious vehicle can i write down the plate number just in case something happens?
Can your worthless little mind not comprehend the difference between surveillance equipment that belongs to a single source recording everything automatically and someone writing something down? Really? And you're on Slashdot? Vanish!
The privacy nuts get way over the edge these days.
No, you government drones go way over the edge. You are literally making this country worse. We have people like you to thank for the TSA, the NSA spying, stop-and-frisk, free speech zones, constitution-free zones, DUI checkpoints, and the hundreds of other small ways the government is violating our rights. Get rid of your trust for the government. Get rid of your desire to justify everything the government does.
Thank you Dave Raggett
tracking a person's car without a warrant is illegal, per the SCOTUS.
This case established that police can not electronically track a vehicle by a secretly installed GPS device without a warrant. To date, an officer is still allowed to monitor a vehicle operating on the public roadways.
"Unfortunately, a newly promoted mid-manager didn't force an NDA with this project proposal, and some idiot sub-contractor decided to announce our intentions to the web. When we introduce it again, after that mid-manager gets promoted, none of you will hear about it in the future!"
1984 and Snowcrash weren't F*#$ing how to manuals! This is insane!
So they (would of) only be tracking Internal Combustion Engine powered vehicles? Thats a good for the Tesla, Volt and Leaf owners...
Read the numerous comments above that debunk your shortsighted, freedom-hating nonsense.
Thank you Dave Raggett
..this solicitation will be reviewed to ensure the path forward appropriately meets our operational needs.
Translation: "We'll put this aside for now because you caught us out and pitched a fit about it like the little criminals we believe you all to be, and we'll wait until you inevitably forget about it, then we'll re-word it, hide it in some other, completely unassociated legislation, where it'll be voted on in the middle of the night and passed, then signed into law quietly without so much as a whisper from the media."
Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
It's obviously being used against you.
Quit supporting candidates who want a "fair tax" that they can "invest".
Because THIS is the crap they want to "invest" in.
Yes, license plates are for identifying cars. The 4th Amendment, however, was preserved due to the sheer volume of cars out there. A government official (police, FBI, etc.) had to "manually" focus on a single car at a time when there was a reason to pay attention to it. The extra work required to track too many people at once protected the 4th amendment.
Today's tech, however, can now passively track everyone with no effort - which blows away that illusory wall between the 4th amendment and license plate tracking. The moment some government official decides that they're a "person of interest" (whatever that means to that official at that time), they have a practically infinite amount of data to use against them already.
Why am I a "privacy nut" for seeing this problem and talking about it?
More importantly, why are you not concerned with this overreach?
Privacy nuts are usually branded as paranoid against the government, but I submit that people who call us "privacy nuts" have their own deep seated and subtle paranoia of their neighbors. If one really thinks about it, why else would one allow the government to track everyone everywhere in their cars if they weren't worried about some "what if" scenario where the guy next door could be "evil" and could hurt them?
In other words it's being classified and will be exploited by the NSA to further violate the 4th Amendment rights of legal US Citizens they couldn't otherwise prosecute if the time came. "Good Old Fashion" Police work my ass.
Install backdoors in the existing ALPR databases so that they can download the data secretly and without any legal oversight.
There was a story not more than a few weeks/months ago where a local law enforcement agency had ignored the license plates of stolen cars they'd scanned. This is nothing more than another data point for the government's Total Information Awareness database.
The only way to make this stuff illegal is to pass laws expressly forbidding it. The Feds have been using cute interpretations of privacy laws to pull this crap; with a wink and nod from Congress.
I see lots of outrage on this website; I wonder how much there is in the general population. Either they're not aware or they don't care and from polls I've seen on the Snowden revelations I assume the latter.
I swear to God...I swear to God! That is NOT how you treat your human!
They are easy to spot for goodness sake, no need for tracking license plates.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
First, these people (HLS and the Gov in general) can't be trusted, you would never have known about this if they had their way.
Second, to "shelve" it means "re-brand the project" and wait a couple of months then implement it.
Last, you are going to have to do way more than complain if you want things to change, the noose is tightening everyday while most people are not even aware it's around their neck.
http://iweb.tntech.edu/kosburn...
"If any question why we died, Tell them because our fathers lied."
Amazing...you state truth with facts and some dipshit with an agenda on here marks your post as a Troll -1 while other's who subscribe to that moderator's point of view are marked "Insightful". WTF? So much for having your point of view heard because of one asswipe.
Been on this site for almost 15 years and only recently have I been marked as Troll because I don't subscribe to the current philosophy that everything the gov't does is bad. /. has gone to the dogs.
The very purpose of a license plate is to make public the identity of a specific vehicle. Trying to say that govenrment or anyone else can not keep records of where a plate is noticed is absurd.
Bullshit, once again. You government drones need to think for yourselves. It is not absurd to say that while it is possible for people to see you in public places, the government shouldn't be installing surveillance equipment everywhere. The latter is what people want to be free from.
It does not track the owner at all. The tag identifies the car and not the driver.
But it tracks the car, which is bad enough. In my case, it would be more than enough to track me.
Worse yet one doesn't even need a plate unless one uses the vehicle on a public road.
Which nearly everyone does. A moot point.
So just what element is private about a plate openly displayed in public.
The part where we step up and demand that the government not install surveillance equipment in public places, which is a far cry from someone merely seeing you.
If I notice a suspicious vehicle can i write down the plate number just in case something happens?
Can your worthless little mind not comprehend the difference between surveillance equipment that belongs to a single source recording everything automatically and someone writing something down? Really? And you're on Slashdot? Vanish!
The privacy nuts get way over the edge these days.
No, you government drones go way over the edge. You are literally making this country worse. We have people like you to thank for the TSA, the NSA spying, stop-and-frisk, free speech zones, constitution-free zones, DUI checkpoints, and the hundreds of other small ways the government is violating our rights. Get rid of your trust for the government. Get rid of your desire to justify everything the government does.
An attitude like that will get you fucked over if a significant number of your country men felt the same way. It is the same kind of attitude that brought the world such fine leaders like Pol Pot, Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Chairman Mao, etc. If you don't like the way your government is heading, fix it within the system. I am sure that with a population of over 300 million people you could find enough people to run for congress and the senate who have the backbone to steer the USA back onto the right direction. Trying to remove the entire government and support all in one go will open the door to someone who will make things a hell of a lot worse...
The problem is that surveillance is that it's asymmetric.
One group of "special" people gains access to the data to use (apparently) in anyway they see fit.
Every one else has to "trust" them.
Since I truly have nothing to hide, I say open source all of it.
Consider the hours of fun and amusement that would result from really understanding who our Congress critters, CEOs and various self-righteous luminaries spent their time with.
If we're going to have surveillance "to protect people", let's really protect them from all enemies, foreign and domestic.
I would bet we will see this project continue under some other name with a new and improved excuse for existing.
GPS location tracking requires the placement of a tracking device on the suspect's vehicle. Or perhaps surrepticious access of the car's on-board telematics (e.g. On-Star) which requires cooperation from the service provider.
"The solicitation, which was posted without the awareness of ICE leadership,"
COMPELETE BULLSHIT.
At no point did the GP advocate removing the entire government, though it could be construed that he implied that specific entities should be removed, such as the TSA. The GP admonished (possibly blind) trust in the government, and the desire some have to be apologists for government overreach. As Americans, we're not supposed to trust the government. That doesn't mean we're supposed to hate it either, but the GP didn't call for that. We're supposed to have a healthy mistrust of the government, a position that is strongly supported by much of human history. Government is an unfortunate necessity (sorry, anarchists), not a boon, nor necessarily a bane, but it has to be monitored closely and diligently.
- T
Don't fucking trust them, and instead of verifying, watch them like a freaking hawk.
It's only a matter of time until a private company provides this service.
I thought of doing this years ago.
At the time, I imagined paying people to install cameras in vehicles, and selling access to the database to law enforcement, employers, spouses, etc. Now, that probably isn't necessary. The company could just scan the millions of photos and videos that are posted publicly every day.
If some company isn't already experimenting with this, I would be amazed.
In the end, this will be done, either by the government or a company; probably both.
Long live the Speaker Bracelet
Rolo D. Monkey
That SCOTUS decision says nothing of the sort. It says the police are not allowed to secretly plant a tracking device without a warrant. It says nothing at all about the legality of tracking via something on the car which is publicly visible, whether it's the license plate or just keeping track of the make, model, and specific pattern of dents your car has.
I think tracking like this is going to become de rigueur within a very few years. I don't know that I like it, but I don't see any way of stopping it. I mean, you can see the bloody plate right there in front of you. It's not like anyone could argue that they didn't know. The only way to stop this sort of tracking would be to outlaw traffic cameras, and that horse left the barn ages ago.
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
This is getting old. The last time that America raised taxes on these was under reagan. It has sat stagnate all this time. That is why the roads are in horrible shape. To make matters worse, the states can not raise taxes, ESP. diesel, since the vehicles will simply buy in the neighboring state and avoid you all together.
.25/gal each year for the next 4 years. That will SLOWLY increase it and give ppl and companies time to adjust.
So, the RIGHT way to do this is to raise the FEDERAL taxes on diesel/gas by
In addition, the new gas taxes should go to the state. These are mostly cars, and small commercial vehicles that travel inside of a state. The state must then spend it ONLY on their infrastructure, and are not allowed to cut their current gas taxes. If they do, then feds can raise it within that state by that amount and pass it back to the feds
OTOH, all of the federal diesel needs to remain with the feds, and it needs to be applied to roads, bridges, dams, etc.
Finally, it is long past time for us to pass the old nat gas bill. We need to get commercial vehicles off oil and over to nat gas.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
How do you stop the government from placing cameras everywhere to track our movements? Easy, you see a government camera you smash it. Tell everyone you meet to do the same. If enough people do this then the government can't replace them fast enough. If people get arrested for it then demand a trial by jury. If the jury is equally pissed off about the cameras then no one gets a conviction. Vote for people that won't put cameras everywhere.
If none of that works then what you have is the police arresting everyone that smashes a camera. Because they know a jury will not convict then these people have "unfortunate accidents" while "resisting arrest" and due to "unforeseen traffic conditions" they die in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. What happens then is open war by the government on the citizens. At that point we stop breaking cameras and start breaking skulls.
In other words, use the four boxes of liberty. Soap, ballot, jury, and cartridge boxes. Use them in that order, starting now.
Use of the ballot box should be sufficient. If these elected officials cannot stop themselves from spying on the people that voted them into office then they should not be surprised when they get dragged from office feet first.
I went to the extreme of pointing out the possible use of the fourth box of liberty only because I know that a government that spies on its citizens is inevitably doing more than just spying. They spy for a reason. They spy so they can act against us. They govern only with the permission of the governed. Once permission is removed those that govern can step down on their own power, or not. They get to choose. If they choose poorly then they leave public office feet first.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
Until we have completely ubiquitous transportation, either by public transit or autonomous cars, driving needs to be a right.
NO, absolutely not. There are definitely people that should not be allowed to drive. If you are incapable of operating a motor vehicle safely (either due to medical issues or a simple disregard for the safety of others), it is YOUR problem to find a place to live/work where you can get back and forth without driving (carpool is also an option).
You have a good point, but all too often, the guys hanging out in front of Home Depot aren't doing any damage. ICE has a greatly reduced incentive to pick up those guys when they could instead be focusing on those who commit (non-victimless) crimes.
Getting across the border illicitly is expensive; a coyote runs in the range of $1-3k depending on experience, reputation, and location. Most people who spend that kind of money aren't dumb kids looking for a new place to commit crimes. They are generally hard-working men who have been down on their luck in Mexico and want a chance to raise the funds necessary to earn a better life for their families. Day laboring is often the first step for these individuals. The fact that we pay them shit is a moral issue for another day, but the fact that they're willing to work for very little money has, at times, had large effects on the economy.
If we kicked out every illegal immigrant, our economy would be damaged, millions would be robbed of their chances at a good life, and there would be (imho) little effect on crime. Instead, we should focus on the ones who are persistent offenders.
Ultimately, your country of citizenship should not matter. Whether you're from the US, Mexico or Timbuktu you're a person, and should have the ability to pursue a life where you want it.
(I realize that this is an incredibly idealist way of looking at things, and that the immigration and integration processes are considerably more complicated than presented here, however I end here for the sake of brevity.)