Are Flock license plate reader cameras a massive fourth amendment violation?

[Snakeyes7]

This whole thing is a fourth amendment violation and I think tarring and feathering whoever is responsible is too good for them.

Updates

1 mo

Somehow I get the feeling that many of you would accept Ingsoc without question.

[Mike_Hum]

Multiple court decisions have stated that they don't violate the 4th as you have no expectation of the privacy of your license plate on public streets.

[Snakeyes7]

Yeah "public" as in the entrance to your apartment complex.

[Snakeyes7]

That's like a cul-de-sac in the middle of the woods.

[Mark_Est]

Typical NPC

[Mike_Hum]

@Mark_Est ok retard

[KostasKouvalis]

Probably. Many laws in the US actually violate the constitution

[Snakeyes7]

I hope we can go after them someday citing Marbury v Madison arguing that it they are null and void because they are repugnant to the constitution.

[Agape93]

Absolutely

[Static_In_The_Attic]

As for Flock license plate readers they are a massive Fourth Amendment violation is an ongoing legal debate. Some courts and civil liberties groups argue they facilitate invasive, warrantless mass surveillance, while other judges and the company itself maintain they are constitutional tools that only capture information in public view.

As for license plate readers I’m all for them & where I live the city installed them last year & is installing more on a monthly basis & the system has already paid for itself.

As for the Flock license plate readers my city didn’t install that brand however they installed the ones from NDI Recognition Systems which is basically the same.

As for the eye in the sky they are everywhere & a lot of places are installing facial recognition systems as well.

[HawkPerception]

As technology develops and progresses, there is less privacy. That is just the way it is. Humans want more and more control over others. I'm really not a fan of the way society is going with Digital ID being rolled out and everything being recorded with more and more cameras and surveillance tech in place. You should look into smart dust too. And it's proven they can even use wifi frequencies to map people in houses, like a bat's echolocation. There is no such thing as privacy nowadays.

More and more, first-world countries around the world are turning into police states. And it's for this reason I understand where Unabomber (Ted Kaczynski) was coming from.

[RichardCranium6201]

So this is a touchy subject for most. I get it. I understand. But for the record who cares if they know what your doing. Who cares if they watch u. I can honestly say this... u might think those are a invasion of privacy, but if someone broke into ur house, and broke your shower head handle (not really a shower head handle using that instead of)
The cops would then go back view the recordings and go make an arrest. I seen something like this locally. Police come to a domestic violence call that was in my area. Dude supposedly pushed his girl around and bounced. Supposedly he had a gun in his hand while he was doing that. She calls the cops, cops show up and are able to locate him using those cameras. I don't know the out come to that. But what I do know is those cameras might feel like a violation, but I'd take that violation, if it promises me to keep my family loved ones, neighbors safe.

[BCRanger10]

I've not heard of that until now. I just looked it up though. I don't like it, and the fact that starting next year, all new vehicles will be legally required to be made with facial recognition technology will probably have me wanting to walk everywhere I go.

[molonski2]

How long have you had the cameras?
And if you were going to run your line , ALL literally ALL CTV Would have to be outlawed.

The 4th doesn't matter coz they are not going anywhere , like the rest of the world you will end up with many more.

[AviatorTom]

Yes, next question. Unfortunately, courts (both liberal and conservative) understand how license plate readers make police work easier, and provide easy money to communities and states, so they have been declared legal in most cases.

Florida has recently passed a law banning license plate frames (because they interfere with the readers) and that possibly violates the 1st amendment (driver's freedom of speech). No court cases yet that we know of though.

[genericname85]

can you explain how a flock license plate reader is a "search or seizure"? like as far as i know you don't have an expectation of privacy out and about in public. like don't get me wrong, i intuitively disagree with them too but i don't see why they are a problem on the basis of the fourth amendment.

[msc545]

So of course, they're a huge Fourth Amendment violation, but it doesn't make any difference because the Fourth Amendment is not a good law anymore. No part of the Constitution is good law anymore except the parts that the right wing likes and the parts Trump likes.

[Snakeyes7]

What do you mean it's not a good law? It's not even really a law, just a line the government is not supposed to cross. Do you mean to say its outdated?

[msc545]

Not so much outdated as it is ignored, police departments routinely ignore Fourth Amendment issues and perform illegal searches and seizures all the time now. The federal government is a primary offender in terms of violating Fourth Amendment provisions. The Fourth Amendment might as well be dead. It's actually not quite dead yet, but it's on life support at this point, just like free speech is.

[Snakeyes7]

Ok i cam agree with you on that

[Snakeyes7]

*can

[BadApple69]

What’s the difference if a camera reads your plate or the cop does? There is zero issue as long as you are registered. Now if you are breaking the law I can see the issue.

[Snakeyes7]

"If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear." Is that what you are saying?

[MrOracle]

No, technically they aren't, but I wouldn't mind seeing a new law that would outlaw them.

[Snakeyes7]

Why not? Is it not warrant-less spying?

[MrOracle]

You do not have any expectation of privacy in public, so, no, it isn't. There is plenty of case law regarding this. That's why it would require specific new laws.

[Snakeyes7]

That would be a good argument if they didn't pop up to observe even the most random spots. I have one observing the entrance of my apartment complex and its in the woods about a quarter mile from a highway.

[msc545]

All you have to do is mount one in a vehicle, and it can be moved anywhere the police feel like moving it, in any random spot you can think of.

[exitseven]

These cameras are placed in public places so nobody should have any expectation of privacy.

[Snakeyes7]

There is one planted right outside my apartment complex looking at the entrance. That's not in the middle of a town square or highway.

[exitseven]

is it a public walkway?

[Snakeyes7]

Nope, its a dead end in the middle of the woods just to the side of a highway.

[noohair]

What about all the data that cars collect now?

[Godihateyou]

They are 2nd amendment violations. Use it. On all of the tyrants

[Anonymous]

No quit whining.

[Mark_Est]

100% a violation