There is a growing privacy concern with the proliferation of automatic license plate readers primarily centering around the creation of massive databases that potentially could be used for surveillance purposes. ALPR devices are being used by both government and private businesses and several states, including Utah, enacted laws regulating their use. The use of such technology by law enforcement has proven to be valuable for solving crimes and recovering stolen vehicles.
Do you believe the privacy implications of the use of ALPR technology are serious enough to warrant a federal law regulating its use?
Yes. Because the license plate is linked to your car which is linked to you and your immediate family this would make it so that if there were no regulations the government could install these ALPR devices in all of the traffic cameras around a city and be able to follow you around digitally using your plate number. They could track your car to everywhere you go throughout the day. So unless you start walking or biking everywhere they could have a pretty decent idea of where you were. I don't think this is as serious of a matter as tracking cell phones or tracking people using facial recognition for tracking because it is a lot easier to get around without a car than it is to go places without a phone or your face.
ReplyDeleteYou talk about how serious the control of this information can be, but give no justification as to why you answered yes on the question of a federal law. I'm just curious if you think that the mere severity of an issue in general constitutes the need for federal control, and if so, why? Why can't the states govern the regulation of serious issues?
DeleteJust curious. :)
Well, back in the day, they would just have a specific police officer tail your car if they wanted to know where you are going--they still CAN do that to be honest, so why not allow the implementation of something that is useful for solving crime?
DeleteFederal law should exist because the limitless use of such technology, as mentioned by the articles in the reading, amount to a warrantless search. The data collected paints an accurate picture of an individual's personal life, including potentially embarrassing or sensitive information. The use of ALPR's is concerning mainly because law enforcement agencies store all the data collected, rather than only keeping the pertinent information. This gives law enforcement much greater power and much more information than I personally feel they should ever have about innocent people.
ReplyDeleteYes I do think there should be a federal law associated with the use of this technology because as the Supreme Court pointed out in Torrey Dale Grady v. North Carolina, electronic surveillance can be considered a search. I believe that the gathering and - perhaps more importantly - the use of the information has direct ties to the 4th amendment of the constitution, and an issue of that importance should be governed by a national standard.
ReplyDeleteYes, although I'm a bit conflicted. On one hand, the regulation of ALPR devices within each state's use of the technology (local law enforcement agencies, parking enforcement, state investigators, etc) seems to be a state's issue, since the scope of ALPR's varies widely by state (and widely within each state). On the other hand, this ALPRs are probably used often nationally by the FBI (to track down criminals) and by private companies (to monitor parking on their properties, for example). The use of these readers nationwide warrants federal regulations, although perhaps only for national agencies and interstate commerce. State and local use of the ALPR devices should still remain a state's issue, unless they infringe upon the Fourth Amendment or an existing federal law or ruling.
ReplyDeleteYes one hundred percent. I don't like the idea of the government creating databases of when and where they read my license. This basically lets them know my schedule and so many other things about me. This is valuable data I would hope remains private. However, if It is for a law investigation I understand where It would be needed. However a warrant would do very nicely. Still the fact that they are storing this data somewhere really perturbs me.
ReplyDeleteWhile I think that there should be *laws* about the use of ALPR devices, I don't believe that it should be at a federal level. I also don't think it is necessary to regulate their use by private businesses, only for law enforcement. I think this goes along with what we discussed in class about cell-site-simulators--perhaps data not directly necessary for an ongoing investigation should be discarded (ex: my daily routine won't be directly monitored, but once I run a red light, it will be until I'm pulled over)
ReplyDeleteYes, I do think ALPRs pose a serious enough threat to privacy for them to be regulated by federal law because they have the potential to violate the 4th Amendment by searching a person through their travels unreasonably, much like StingRays. One example of where federal regulation could be useful is think ALPRs should be regulated is because they could be used to track a person who travels via car between states, which could subject them to certain types of profiling, such as bringing marijuana from a state where it is legal to a state where it is illegal.
ReplyDeleteI do believe it is serious enough to warrant a federal law regulating its use. I think the collection of this data would be cataloged as an unreasonable search. Although one could argue that it is a collection and not an actual search, I would counter that this data has the potential to identify where someone travels for how long and where they are going. Thus a violation of privacy.
ReplyDeleteYes, the concerns of misuse are serious enough to justify implementations of federal laws revolving around the governments use of ANPR technology. As this technology advances and becomes less expensive to manufacture, it’s going to become more accessible for cities to implement. This technology could be exploited by using it to monitor people’s locations.
ReplyDeleteNo, I don't think ALPRs pose a serious enough threat to privacy for them to be regulated by a federal law. I agree there should be limits to their use but only when implemented by law enforcement, not private businesses. In addition, while the limitless use of the technology could infringe on privacy rights, there are already broad privacy laws in place to protect our privacy, such as the fourth amendment. So, while I don't believe the use of ALPRs pose a serious threat to privacy, on the off chance that their use ever became so prolific that privacy rights were infringed upon, the supreme court could issue an interpretation of the fourth amendment applied to/concerning the use of this technology.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that license plate readers need federal regulation. As was seen in the article that was the third reading for this week, a license plate scanner can be as useful as a GPS device in tracking a vehicles routes through a city, with the only difference being that the daily route a car takes may be constructed over many days rather than instantaneously. Using scans of a license plate it is possible for the users of the license plate scanners (police or private entity) to compile data taken over an extended period of time and determine where someone lives (seen in 1st reading for the week), where they work, other places that go (such as political rallies), as well as routes they use to go from a to b. Since the Supreme Court ruled that a warrant is needed to place a tracker on a vehicle, in part because it is tracked over an extended period of time, then at least as much regulation should be necessary for government use of license plate scanners as the same end result is achieved. I know the University of Utah uses license plate scanners to enforce parking restrictions, and the University of Utah is a part of the government, however this use and others like it should not require a warrant and could most likely be covered by a terms of use agreement for the parking lots, etc.
ReplyDeleteI do believe that ALPRs have enough of a threat to privacy that they should be regulated. It is clear that the technology is great for solving crime and invaluable in finding car thefts. The danger lies in the storage and use of the data that isn’t involved with a crime. A database can be created showing every place you drive to that’s near an ALPR. This means the users of the ALPR can easily track a person and learn about their habits without their notice, even if they have no reason to be suspected. In the hands of private companies ALPRs can be easily abused. Regulations should be put in place to avoid keeping irrelevant data around, in order to avoid random targeting and profiling.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think that there should be a federal law regulating the use of ALPRs. It's a technology that would be easy to misuse in a way where privacy there is a tremendous breach of privacy that would violate our fourth amendment protection against unwarranted electronic surveillance. They are obviously a very useful tool, however the potential for misuse is something I think warrants extra regulation.
ReplyDelete