If it goes to a chop shop, I would imagine that the tags come off right away for the ride to said chop shop, or are switched with the tags on some poor schmucks car. But yeah, if the thieves are really, really stupid that might work out.
Because I never defined my limits in the first paragraph:
Nope, no definition of my limits at all.
If Chicago ends up coated in cameras like London, fine with me. I do everything in this city either on foot or on the CTA. If the presence of cameras deters even one guy from trying to mug me, fine. If the presence of cameras helps catch the crazy person who assaults me or another passenger while we’re in a train car with nowhere to go and nothing for defense besides my pepper spray and a knife, fine too. Somebody may still end up killed or in the hospital, but it’s all on tape and everyone’s accountable. Cameras on the CTA has helped catch a few criminals and criminal acts, up to and including those by the drivers.
I’m not giving up any freedom at all by allowing video surveillance right up to my front door.
In September of 2007, a Federal judge deemed parts of the Act violated the Fourth Amendment. There may be other violations that I don’t recall at the moment.
On a side note, Congress recently voted to not extend portions of the Act related to roving wiretaps, library records, and surveillance of targets not connected to an identified terrorist group.
Oooh, wool, I love that Brillo-pad feeling along me as I get ready to drop my…wait, what?
Regarding the issue of not getting anything chemical on the cameras: In the county where I live the law enforcement vehicles are hand-washed by trusties. This would apparently solve the auto-wash problem, even though the OP wouldn’t make any money.
I have no opinion one way or the other regarding the use of the cameras to investigate outstanding warrants. Part of me says, “if you can’t do the time…” and the other part says, “you’d better damn sure not make a mistake, buddy!” I suppose if I were driving a friend’s car, my license would keep me out of jail, but if I get braced because of it, I’m gonna get the red ass.
Thanks
Q
Cool!
You ain’t the one who gets to decide that it stops at your front door.
They get precedents to mess with yes, crooks, but us, too.
If policemen were the friendly, helpful guys of my childhood, that would be cool, but at least some of them bust a family for growing pot and there is mysteriously only an ounce in evidence, not the several pounds that was grown.
I have to do this you understand, and it isn’t personal, but…what kind of a Steelers fan are you? Did you give up when you knew your top linebacker and wideout were revealed to be cheap shot artists? No!
You championed on and on about the legacy, the ownership…did you get stalled when it became apparent that your quarterback is a rapist asshole? NO! You perservered!
Frankly I’m appalled that an issue you feel so strongly about you refused to dig your heels into. What do they feed you guys in the AF mess, a helping of French weak sauce?
Dunno. Was he slipperly sloping when he said that killing people was the best way to keep secrets? 
The founding fathers were great guys, I’m sure. They were also slave owners who rebelled against their government, and who were far from infallible or immaculate. Ben Franklin’s opinion in my book gets every bit of credibility on the face of it as any other politician or businessman.
The police have these in the UK too. They can check if a car’s insured or stolen. I’m happy for the police to be able to easily identify both uninsured drivers and stolen cars easily and safely.
Ok, it’s like scanning every human being on the street and looking for some violation – is there “probable cause”?
That’s the rub – it’s NOT really “always” in view if they can’t capture it without high-speed cameras.
Well, not exactly. They are searching you and recording you with high speed cameras, then they’re ALSO searching their own databases. Just because it’s okay for them to search their own databases doesn’t make the rest of it okay.
Aren’t there cases where the use of automation like this where the work would normally have to be done by an actual human being mitigates though? Such as with red light cameras? May not be a search per se, but is not exactly clear cut either as to its appropirateness and allowed use?
Because in searching for the bad guys, now they are collecting data about my car and its location and time, and by inference me, and I am sure they are not going to just delete that. Not unlike the knowledge they have on my health purchases when I have a cold and prefer sudafed - I basically need to purchase a license from the local gendarmes to get my medicine and they can compel the store to collect and keep and share the information for unlimited amount of time without a warrant or my knowledge.
In the old days, the 4th was designed to protect against dragnets of this sort.
Somebody doesn’t understand freedom or liberty too well it appears.
We are running a project at work. Similar stuff to the OP. But our cops aren’t chasing outstanding penalties, they are after the estimated 2-4% of vehicles that are unregistered (not necessarily roadworthy) and/or uninsured (get hit by the unemployed drug addict driving it and good luck with suing him for your bills).
No.. it’s like scanning every license plate. Mind you, the license plate isn’t even your property as I understand it, but rather belongs to the state (correct me if I’m wrong). You are paying for the privilege to use it and the benefits it imparts upon you (ie: being able to drive the car in public.)
Sure it is. If it wasn’t in view, the cameras wouldn’t be able to capture the license plate number. If you believe otherwise, you are mistaken in your understanding of how a camera works. And they can capture it without the cameras, it’s just that maybe you’d rather the police officer focus on driving his car instead of futzing with the computer while barreling down the highway at 55MPH.
And “search” is not the word you are looking for. If they search you and your vehicle, then you are probably pulled over on the side of the road with your doors open while the cop searches under the seats, in the glove box, in the trunk, etc. What you are describing is scanning, which is far less intrusive. As far as I know, there isn’t a camera made yet that can actually search you, particularly while driving in a car down the interstate.
Where do we, as reasonably free people (well, in America, UK, Australia, Canada and Western Europe anyway), draw the line with regards to the “Well, if you aren’t doing anything wrong then you don’t have anything to worry about!” argument?
What about those devices at the airport?
I’m not entirely sure about that, but I’m almost certain it should be somewhere at least slightly more private than the outside of a government-licensed automobile being driven down a public road.
I agree, and yet…call me paranoid, but it just seems (to me anyway) that technology is shoehorning privacy into the public demense in a gradual progression. I hesitate to call it insidious because even today people are capable of “dropping off the grid”, but that isn’t a reasonable option for most working folks.
I don’t think this particular case really makes me feel like my privacy is invaded or anything, but its similar to other instances that kind of creep me out, like the RFID chips people are getting implanted into their bodies. Gets one to thinking.