Slashdot Mirror
Malls In California Are Sending License Plate Information To ICE (theweek.com)
Presto Vivace shares a report from The Week with the caption, "And they wonder why some of us prefer to shop online." From the report: Surveillance systems at more than 46 malls in California are capturing license plate information that is fed to Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the Electronic Frontier Foundation reported Tuesday. One company, Irvine Company Retail Properties, operates malls all over the state using a security network called Vigilant Solutions. Vigilant shares data with hundreds of law enforcement agencies, insurance companies, and debt collectors -- including ICE, which signed a contract with the security company earlier this year, reports The Verge. "[Irvine Company] is putting not only immigrants at risk, but invading the privacy of its customers by allowing a third-party to hold onto their data indefinitely," EFF wrote in its report, urging the chain of malls to stop providing information to ICE.
Really? You have a State Issued ID that MUST be affixed to your car, and you are willfully driving it and PARKING IT in public view, on private property. And that is invading privacy?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Solution: Do not come here illegally.
I think that's a great idea.
I mean, those damned spacecraft really mess up my Wifi. You'd think an advanced civilization would have things cleaned up a bit.
Thanks for the tip.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
Since malls are dying, I guess the problem will eventually solve itself. Thanks Amazon.
Here to the US.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Does anybody believe only one real estate corporation is giving away or selling this kind of information? I don't have any legal problems, but I resent being spied on.
So thanks for giving me one more good reason not to visit the US. I'll just spend my money right here in Canada, where at least some pathetic vestiges of actual freedom still survive.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Tell that to the Native Americans. I think they would have agreed with you and you wouldn't be here either.
No good deed goes unpunished.
There is no need to display your licence number when on private property, so a dash activated hinged flap could be used to hide plate data. They could snap plate data on the way into the mall, but that could involve placing the camera on someone else's private property - who might decline permission.
That said, I do not mind plate scanners being use to find stolen cars or payment defaulted cars (3 months arrears minimum)
My wife is an immigrant, is she at risk?
[Irvine Company] is putting not only immigrants at risk
No, they're not endangering anybody, which is the implication. They're making it more likely that ILLEGAL immigrants will be caught. There's a choice that they can make, which is not enter the country illegally.
I have friends who are illegal immigrants. It's difficult and I don't blame them for being here. But they know the risk that they take by even being here, and they've decided it's worth it for their kids to grow up here instead of the home country (which is a complete shithole, not the fault of the US).
The left will only continue to hurt themselves by trying to conflate legal immigration with illegal immigration. "Immigrants" don't have anything to worry about unless they're also "illegal".
Do you have ESP?
The best t-shirt I ever saw said something like this (probably not verbatim):
Se vi parolas du lingvojn, vi estas dulingva.
Se vi parolas tri lingvojn vi estas trilingva.
Se vi parolas unu lingvon vi estas usona
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Vikings: a little more than 1,000 years ago.
Native Americans: a little more than 15,000 years ago.
No doubt they Vikings did arrive on these shores; but the continent was already long since populated.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Unless you are a criminal, ICE really doesn't have any standing to hassle you if you have a Green Card. If you are a criminal, then you are by law subject to potential deportation.
Once you have become an actual immigrant, and are no longer "just visiting", then ICE no longer has any jurisdiction over you.
Data collection, aggregation, and distribution has been a thing for a long time now. It really has nothing to do with the tribal partisan hysteria du jour.
It's much like the INS in this regard.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
I think you are a bit slow on the uptake. Imagine if *everyone* constantly reported everyone who looks like a foreign national to ICE.
Think about it a bit.
My instincts thought it read like a joke... but this is Slashdot and you never know- there is a lot of stupidity and racism on this forum, you can never be sure.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
Tell that to the Native Americans. I think they would have agreed with you and you wouldn't be here either.
Tell that to the Clovis people. I think they would have agreed with you and the "native" Americans wouldn't be here either. Unless you think they were taken away by actual aliens...
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
He's a troll. Look at his comment history.
At least he's doing it right.
Democrats who want to abolish ICE are literally handing Donald Trump his reelection on a silver platter.
Let's not enforce any border laws and let's see how that turns out. Idiots.
I'm not a Trump supporter, and I'm merely a centrist, but I agree that it is a foolish platform to take.
I'm against excessive and invasive persecution and hunting for illegals. I'm not blind to the fact that we need to limit illegal immigration. My main concern is that a lot of anti-immigration is down to bigotry and nationalistic sentiment that can escalate; and has rapidly escalated many many times in many many countries throughout history. It doesn't take long to get into some McCarthyistic witch hunt for immigrants, and start finding reasons to mark legal immigrants as criminals for obscure rules and start deporting them.
It's not ICE that I oppose- ICE Is important. It's the racist sentiment behind a lot of the actions of some of the laws that I oppose. It is the nationalism that could escalate dangerously that I oppose. The more fervent the head-hunting for illegals, the more likely that legal immigrants get caught up in this- either accidentally or deliberately. Already, there are plenty of stories of legal aliens being arrested and detained for months because they're mistaken as illegals.
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
If this were an online activity, it would be blatantly illegal under the GDPR, because it: 1) Collects permanent, personal identifying data (license plate number) 2) Does not allow the user to opt out 3) Is not relevant to providing the user with a service (shopping) 4) Retains the data indefinitely. Should they be allowed to do this just because it is private property? Websites are privately owned too, but they are required to comply with GDPR.
I felt bad for the man who had no signature, until I met a man who had no comment.
Wouldn't that make them agents of the state and make the blanket surveillance a 4th amendment issue?
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
And they wonder why some of us prefer to shop online.
What makes you think the Delivery truck or person/drone walking up your driveway isn't equipped with a camera equipped with GPS, and/or footage won't be submitted to license plate recognition software, and shared with any Law Enforcement agency willing to pay for access to the shared database of License Plate/GPS locations?
Shoot... if ICE is willing to pay enough revenue for license plate data, they could probably convince Meter readers working for the Gas and Power companies to don a camera for a little extra $$$ on the side.
Yes, it IS that simple.
It is rarely that simple. Let's follow a simple sequence of events, then you can respond:
1) A Mexican family crosses into the country illegally: husband, wife, and three babies.
2) The husband gets a job (for the sake of argument, let's even stipulate that he gets a job that would have otherwise gone to an American, since it ultimately doesn't matter).
3) Twelve years pass until the family is caught. The three children are fully indoctrinated Americans in every sense of the word, except for legal citizenship. They identify with being American, as that's how they were raised. They are culturally entirely American.
4) The parents have been paying their taxes, abiding by all the same laws American's abide by, and have behaved entirely as any loyal American. But now they face the prospect of deportation back to a land that even the parents find unfamiliar, and that, to the children, is completely foreign.
Forcefully sending that family to Mexico is a cruel punishment, even though the parents violated our immigration laws. The children did nothing wrong, and there is no benefit to separating them from their parents. The parents should be given the naturalization test and allowed to stay, and the children granted retroactive citizenship.
While we can't, and shouldn't, open our borders to unconstrained immigration, neither should we be so rigid as to cut off our noses to spite our faces.
You're right. Except......
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/civil-wars/articles/2018-01-05/the-trump-administration-now-targeting-legal-immigrants
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
You think standing matters to ICE or Border Patrol?
How credulous can you be?
Who the heck is so ignorant that they don't know crossing an international border without permission is illegal?
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
You don't need ICE to fight gang violence. We already have laws which address it.
Right. And lefty jurisdictions are busy establishing policies that prevent those laws from being enforced.
No, no they are not. Nobody is trying to establish policies that will prevent laws against gang violence from being enforced. So that's a lie.
Lefty politicians are calling for the very agency that enforces those laws to be "abolished,"
ICE is violating its mandate by abusing people outside of that mandate. If it cannot stick to what it is supposed to be doing, then yes, it should be abolished.
and for people who violate those laws to be given sanctuary, free legal services, housing, protection from prosecution, etc.
"Free legal services" are a constitutional right. It's called due process, and if you are against due process, you are the same kind of traitor as Trump. Protection from prosecution is for non-violent crimes, not violent ones, you pathetic FUD-spreader. "Sanctuary city" doesn't mean permission to commit crimes. It means a city where the police won't help ICE violate their mandate.
Yes, a person who's here illegally CAN be deported for committing felonies. At which point thousands and thousands of them routinely, and literally just walk right back across the border, over and over again
First, why do those people want to walk over the border? Answer, their country is shit, at least in part because we have been shitting on it. The war on some drugs, exporting guns to their country and in some cases placing them directly in the hands of criminals like we did in Mexico, coups and other interference in their governments... we did that. If we don't want a bunch of refugees coming across our southern border, we should stop shitting on their home nations. We don't have shitloads of Canadians streaming over our northern border, it's not an inherent property. It's something we've created.
Second, ICE deports a lot of people to Mexico whether they're Mexican or not. Mexico doesn't want them, so they don't imprison them either. So they just come back. That's also our fault, but it's directly ICE's fault. Once deported, these people are also more likely to have to cross the border on foot, because they've already spent all their money getting across the border some other way.
just the way that liberal politicians like it.
Liberals, politicians or not, would like our policies to change away from shitting on those countries, so that their people don't want to come here any more because their own country is viable. Barring that, we want to treat the people harmed by our nation's policies (and actions) like humans, because that's what humans do. What do people do on your home planet?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
It will take a few generations, but now that we're banning abortion, I'm sure the American people can make up the lack of population.
SJW: a person who perceives an injustice, and while correcting it, commits a greater injustice.
ICE shouldn't be in the business of breaking up gangs.
That's not their mission, but it is a happy byproduct of their work when large numbers of people in certain especially violent international gangs happen to be in the country illegally. How are you not clear on this? A county cop can't kick an illegal alien career criminal out of the country. ICE can.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Tell that to the Native Americans. I think they would have agreed with you and you wouldn't be here either.
This seems reasonable on the surface but how far back does it go? My understanding is that the people here when the Europeans arrived were not the earliest, or original, inhabitants. If you're familiar with Mexico you know that some are very indian while others are more European. Do we screen them all to see who stays and who goes? What's the criteria? As with so many slogans "Tell that to the Native Americans" is neither practical nor even what they would desire. I'd be perfectly willing to pull up stakes and move but I'm 100% sure that the native americans as a group have zero interest in gong back to stone age existence. Doubly so for those with casinos. Instead they imagine a scenario where they get to have their cake and eat it too.
Yes, it IS that simple.
It is rarely that simple. Let's follow a simple sequence of events, then you can respond:
1) A Mexican family crosses into the country illegally: husband, wife, and three babies.
2) The husband gets a job (for the sake of argument, let's even stipulate that he gets a job that would have otherwise gone to an American, since it ultimately doesn't matter).
3) Twelve years pass until the family is caught. The three children are fully indoctrinated Americans in every sense of the word, except for legal citizenship. They identify with being American, as that's how they were raised. They are culturally entirely American.
4) The parents have been paying their taxes, abiding by all the same laws American's abide by, and have behaved entirely as any loyal American. But now they face the prospect of deportation back to a land that even the parents find unfamiliar, and that, to the children, is completely foreign.
Forcefully sending that family to Mexico is a cruel punishment, even though the parents violated our immigration laws. The children did nothing wrong, and there is no benefit to separating them from their parents. The parents should be given the naturalization test and allowed to stay, and the children granted retroactive citizenship.
While we can't, and shouldn't, open our borders to unconstrained immigration, neither should we be so rigid as to cut off our noses to spite our faces.
Your narrative is completely sympathetic to the illegal immigrants yet doesn't account for the losses to actual citizens. For example class sizes were increased so their citizens children's education suffered. The children had to attend ESL classes at extra expense. Traffic and housing were slightly impacted for the worse. You may think these factors don't matter, and for sample size 1 it wouldn't, but when you have millions of illegals it adds up. Make immigration actually work for the existing citizens and they would embrace it.
Forcefully sending that family to Mexico is a cruel punishment, even though the parents violated our immigration laws. The children did nothing wrong, and there is no benefit to separating them from their parents. The parents should be given the naturalization test and allowed to stay, and the children granted retroactive citizenship.
I agree the children did nothing wrong but the crimes of the parents should not grant the children citizenship. If the parents stole money and used it to buy a house would it be "cruel punishment" to remove the children from the house? The parents' "stole" citizenship and that does not mean the children get to benefit from it. If we allow children that were brought in illegally to retain this stolen citizenship then we are rewarding criminal behavior. It was not the government that imposed "cruel punishment" on the children, it was the parents. Had they stayed in the country they had citizenship then the children would not be in this situation. If the parents had immigrated legally then the children would not be in this situation.
Let's look at this part specifically:
The children did nothing wrong, and there is no benefit to separating them from their parents.
I agree, the children should not be separated from the parents, they should be deported with the parents. Children born in the USA of illegal aliens should no longer be considered citizens of the USA. At least one parent should be a citizen, and I'd even consider that both parents should be citizens before the children be considered a citizen.
If the parents wanted to be law abiding citizens then they are off to a bad start by being criminals in the USA for years. We don't typically allow criminals to take the naturalization exam. Those that committed a felony cannot be citizens, and multiple violations of immigration law is a felony. Gaining employment under false pretenses is a crime, perhaps a felony. To pay income taxes means having a social security number or tax identification number, and illegal aliens have neither. So either they weren't paying their taxes or they paid taxes under identity fraud. Again, the parents are likely felons and felons are not allowed to be naturalized.
The parents should be punished and deported. Any "cruelty" that is imposed on the children for being deported or being separated from the parents because they were imprisoned was the fault of the parents. If we don't punish these people as spelled out in the law then we only encourage more law breaking.
If the parents don't want to be separated from their children then the first thing they should do is NOT BREAK THE LAW! It's common knowledge that felons are separated from their children by going to prison. It's common knowledge that multiple violations of immigration law is a felony. Felons go to prison and therefore are separated from their children.
Again, if they don't want to be separated from their children then they should not have broken the law. The government didn't separate the children from the parents, the parents separated THEMSELVES from their children by breaking the law.
Don't give me this "think of the children" bullshit! If the parents thought of their children then they would not have this problem. Maybe the parents SHOULD be separated from the children. If they were careless enough to carry their children in the USA without documents, kept them from their homeland for over a decade, had them live under a lie for this time, then they are unfit parents.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.