Justin Case writes:
If you have an IP-enabled security camera, you can download some free, open-source software from GitHub and boom—you have a fully functional automated license plate reader, reports ArsTechnica .
Matt Hill, OpenALPR's founder, told Ars technica "I'm a big privacy advocate... now you've got LPR just in the hands of the government, which isn't a good thing."
Will "they" like it when "we" have a crowdsourced database of where and when congressmen, judges and cops go throughout their work day?
Does this level the playing field? Open yet another can of worms? Both?
The government is purely a creation of laws. We need to put in place laws that control it' use of surveillance. The same way we have laws that prevent the government from just taking citizen's property and murdering people in the dead of night. To argue otherwise is to simply give up on the concept of democracy, you would be advocating a return to monarchy or oligarchy or some other non-representative form of government.
The same way we have laws that prevent the government from just taking citizen's property and murdering people in the dead of night.
In the US, the former is called assert forfeiture, and the latter happens because of the drug war. We should work to fix these issues, but the point is, they are not yet fixed, or at least not in the US.
Who cares about that point? The war on drugs and asset forfeiture are both creations of law. They can be uncreated by law as well. Focus, man, focus!
No, they are violations of law. Asset forfeiture, as often practiced, is a complete violation of the constitution. The drug war often uses unconstitutional methods as well. What we need is accountability for those who break the law and the politicians create the unconstitutional laws and policies. Instead, if the courts care about the constitution at all, the offending laws or policies simply get overturned, but the enforcers and creators of those laws and policies are never punished.
Sounds like you are endorsing a government that is rule of man not rule of law. Good luck with that.
Just the opposite. I want the government to follow the constitution, which is the highest law of the land. I want those in the government who violate the constitution to be punished for doing so. That's the rule of law.
So you are telling me that the solution is to use laws?
Where have I heard that before?
Oh. It was my post that you said was wrong.