Slashdot Mirror
Louisiana Governor Vetoes License Plate Reader Bill, Citing Privacy Concerns
An anonymous reader writes: Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal has vetoed a plan to acquire license plate reading cameras in the state. Law enforcement agencies nationwide use such cameras to scan cars and compare them to a "hot list" of stolen or wanted vehicles. That data is kept for weeks, or even years In some cases. Jindal wrote in a signing statement: "Senate Bill No. 250 would authorize the use of automatic license plate reader camera surveillance programs in various parishes throughout the state. The personal information captured by these cameras, which includes a person’s vehicle location, would be retained in a central database and accessible to not only participating law enforcement agencies but other specified private entities for a period of time regardless of whether or not the system detects that a person is in violation of vehicle insurance requirements. Camera programs such as these that make private information readily available beyond the scope of law enforcement, pose a fundamental risk to personal privacy and create large pools of information belonging to law abiding citizens that unfortunately can be extremely vulnerable to theft or misuse. For these reasons, I have vetoed Senate Bill No. 250 and hereby return it to the Senate."
Too late for what? Apparently 'practically everywhere' does not include Louisiana.
The skeptic in me says he vetoed it as political cover, expecting his veto to be overruled. The article says that the bill "overwhelmingly" passed both Louisiana chambers. This way he can say "I stood up for privacy and against big government" knowing that his veto wasn't going to stop it.
Would he have vetoed it if it barely passed?
Government's idea of a balanced budget: take money from the right pocket to balance...oh who am I kidding?
I see much more potential for evil. Be nice if they had a 0 day retention policy, then it could be used to find stolen cars. But it's a very small step from scanning a plate, checking it against a database, then discarding the into; , to retaining the data for however long The Powers That Be want it. I flat out do not trust the government anymore, I don't want them tracking everyone's cars 24/7.
...when an IP address does not?
Because multiple cars don't share the same license plate. Besides, even if it's just multiple drivers sharing one car (analogous to multiple users on one computer), the "owner" of the car should only be punished incidentally for crimes/violations committed by other people driving the car.
Forgive me for being dense. But you are in a public area with a publicly mandated identifier on your publicly registered vehicle. HOW can you have any expectation of privacy? I could understand them banning a car driving around reading the number plates of cars on driveways or other private property but if you a driving on the road I don't understand.
From what I gather as well it is not the recording of the information so much as the method that has been cited as the issue. So if they were to have someone sitting on the road writing your number plate down as your drove by that would be ok but an automated camera is not?
Jindal was born in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, to immigrants from India. He is an American.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
As a European socialist, let me be the first to say that the government can keep their goddamn noses out of my private affairs.
Socialism is about making some individual sacrifices for the good of society as a whole (because in the bigger picture, that also benefits each individual); not mindlessly letting the government have complete control over my life.
My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan