The use of automatic license plate readers has exploded across the country in recent years. The cameras on roads and freeways that take images of the back of passing cars are popular with police for solving crimes.
But as Trump’s immigration enforcement crackdown has escalated in recent months, residents of various American cities are urging local leaders to stop using these cameras, citing fears of mass surveillance and concerns that local data could be aiding a federal deportation dragnet.
Many of the grassroots campaigns have targeted cameras made by Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based company that has contracts with more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies across the country. Some cities have grappled with the issue and decided to keep their cameras due to public safety, but in a number of places, the pressure has worked.
First (?) Ring, now this. I guess I’m happy people are waking up but I could have done without the last 10+ years of people calling me crazy or paranoid for warning that this exact scenario was coming with these techs. I’m not a prophet I’m just not blind.
My city installed a bunch of them and promptly removed most of them when DHS started using them last year
The only ones I still see are on 2 intersections where crashes happen very often, so I guess they have some “real” purpose. As soon as you cross into the next cities there’s almost one per intersection, I hope they remove them as well
The best way to protect a dataset from falling into the “wrong hands” (for however the “wrong hands” is defined for that dataset) is to not keep that dataset in the first place. While I get that tracking the movement of citizens can make solving some crimes easier, the risks to privacy and of authoritarian abuse are far too great to accept.
Living in a third world dictator I have mixed feelings about the rise of surveillance cameras. They feel a little bit safer especially alone in quite areas but they also feel dangerous knowing the government knows where I’m. I think there was once a sweet spot where enough cameras existed to make the streets slightly safer but also enough blind areas to not feel the big brother eyes watching constantly.
P.S. I don’t actually endorse any amount surveillance and I know what I said sounded like a slippery slope I was simply sharing my feelings on the matter.
It’s certainly one of those hard trade-offs to make. One of the methods for reducing crime is increasing the perceived likelihood of getting caught. Cameras can do that, if there is regular follow-though by government authorities to investigate, arrest and prosecute crimes. Though, there is probably more value in reducing poverty and corruption, which is known to reduce crime. And which has the added benefit of not creating a surveillance network when corruption does creep into government. Of course, that is expensive and might just help the poors, and that is antithetical to authoritarians of every stripe.
https://deflock.org/ get these cameras and drones out of your cities now!
I really wanna do a coordinated attack on these cameras where a large group all at once takes out the cameras in my city. Good luck tracking who destroyed the cameras when they all go down at once.
The idea of a flock camera being installed was brought up at a town hall meeting I went to several months ago, they decided against it and the reason given was:
“I doubt it would last any longer than any of the local stop signs” (Almost all of which have at least one bullet hole)
