Disturbing trend in Law Enforcement

[sjfcontrol]

Mass surveillance by license-plate readers. And collusion between DPS and the reader company.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2016/02/in ... ollectors/

[ScottDLS]

I've known about this and the cell phone tracking and the NSA for years....all from watching NCIS: Los Angeles. LL Cool J always has the NCIS hackers track down the plates and facial recognition by hacking into the California traffic cams. And they ALWAYS get their guy.

[parabelum]

10'th Amendment:

"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively"

9'th Amendment:

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

To stay within the constitutional bounds, a State would have to vote on this.
Anything else is unconstitutional in my opinion.

But again, this is

[ScottDLS]

ScottDLS <--------- Waiting for someone to say driving is a privilege and not a right.... so it's OK for .gov to license you, and spy on you, and track you, and take pictures of you in your underwear because driving isn't in the Bill of Rights....or some such argument...

[Papa_Tiger]

Driving is a privilege, not a right. It is not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, so the government can do whatever they want to you while you are taking advantage of the privilege. This is especially true since when you are in public you have no right to privacy or the 4th Amendment.

Am I doing it right?

[TomV]

A private company has made an offer to law enforcement for access to their data base.

No where does it state that any law enforcement agency has taken them up on it.

[ScottDLS]

Driving is a privilege, not a right. It is not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, so the government can do whatever they want to you while you are taking advantage of the privilege. This is especially true since when you are in public you have no right to privacy or the 4th Amendment.

Am I doing it right?

[Solaris]

Driving is a privilege, not a right. It is not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, so the government can do whatever they want to you while you are taking advantage of the privilege. This is especially true since when you are in public you have no right to privacy or the 4th Amendment.

Am I doing it right?

Yes, you are doing it right.

Anyway back on topic. Yes, private industry is building a massive DB of license plates. Biggest consumers are Repos, but eventually the govt will want access for LE reasons.The genie is out of the bottle, and I do not see it getting put back in. Add in StingRays and Traffic Cams, and as we have seen from McVeigh, and San Bernadino Terrorists, the govt can re-create where ever you have been.

[allisji]

This sounds like a pretty solid idea to me. I can't imagine any way that any of this private information could find its way into the wrong hands for criminal activity or ever be leaked to the general public

[anygunanywhere]

Driving is a privilege, not a right. It is not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, so the government can do whatever they want to you while you are taking advantage of the privilege. This is especially true since when you are in public you have no right to privacy or the 4th Amendment.

Am I doing it right?

Just because a right is not specifically enumerated does not mean we do not have the right. Even if the 2nd Amendment were repealed we would still have the right to keep and bear arms.

God gives us rights, not man, not governments.

[amtank]

Driving is a privilege, not a right. It is not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, so the government can do whatever they want to you while you are taking advantage of the privilege. This is especially true since when you are in public you have no right to privacy or the 4th Amendment.

Am I doing it right?

The 9th Amendment.

"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people."

[BigGuy]

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure I right on this. If not, I'll be truly interested to have somebody with more legal credibility explain it to me.
It seems to me that the restrictions some refer to are actually on the use of public infrastructure. You have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle on public roads and streets. While it's not smart, I don't think it's illegal to let your 3-year-old drive your pickup around the back 40, (your personally owned land.) If I'm correct in that understanding, then not allowing somebody the use of public infrastructure without some conditions isn't depriving anybody of any basic right.
It would be illegal for somebody (Including the government) to set up surveillance on your back 40, without some due process.

[wil]

Driving is a privilege, not a right. It is not enumerated in the Constitution or Bill of Rights, so the government can do whatever they want to you while you are taking advantage of the privilege. This is especially true since when you are in public you have no right to privacy or the 4th Amendment.

Am I doing it right?

close but not quite.

"driving a motor vehicle is a priviledge..." Then you have the terms correct under current law.

[Soccerdad1995]

I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure I right on this. If not, I'll be truly interested to have somebody with more legal credibility explain it to me.
It seems to me that the restrictions some refer to are actually on the use of public infrastructure. You have to have a license to operate a motor vehicle on public roads and streets. While it's not smart, I don't think it's illegal to let your 3-year-old drive your pickup around the back 40, (your personally owned land.) If I'm correct in that understanding, then not allowing somebody the use of public infrastructure without some conditions isn't depriving anybody of any basic right.
It would be illegal for somebody (Including the government) to set up surveillance on your back 40, without some due process.

I paid for that "public" infrastructure. It belongs to me and everyone else who pays taxes (or tolls in certain cases). Reasonable restrictions for safety = sure. Unreasonable restrictions that infringe on my right to privacy = get your hands off the road that I paid for.

I manage a lot of employees. Some of them are at my work place. But by far the most inept of my employees are the ones who work in Washington D.C. They are also the hardest to fire. I think there is a correlation there.

[ScottDLS]

We just need common sense car safety laws...