Print 26 comment(s) - last by damage75.. on Jul 20 at 9:55 PM

It seems they both walk the fine line of being useful, yet big brother-like

Privacy is a hot issue at present, whether it's regarding online privacy or physical privacy in your home or on the street.

Back in 2007, New York ordered license plate readers that would be placed throughout Lower Manhattan in order to monitor vehicles. Then, in 2010, the American Civil Liberties Union investigated Raleigh, North Carolina's use of license plate scanning equipment to determine whether it violated citizens' privacy rights.

Now, a new report from Kenner, Louisiana says that the Kenner Police Department has been using license plate recognition technology to recover stolen vehicles. According to Kenner police, they've been able to find 80 stolen vehicles over the past seven months alone.

"It's the greatest technology to hit law enforcement in a long time," said Kenner Police Chief Steve Caraway. "Within seconds, police officers get a BOLO, a bulletin on their computer saying stolen Toyota headed westbound on Veterans."

The cameras, which were paid for by grants, provide photographs of the back of the stolen vehicle, and the photo is sent to police computers within 20 seconds. In one particular case, two 16-year-old's and a 19-year-old were arrested at Armstrong International Airport after stealing a SUV from New Orleans six days earlier. Police were able to identify the vehicle through the license plate recognition technology.

But this technology didn't only benefit police as far as stolen vehicles go; it also aided police in murder cases, missing person cases and to track sex offenders.

"We've actually solved a recent murder, where all the witnesses saw was just a blue Toyota Camry leaving a neighborhood," said Caraway.

While this system seems to serve its purpose, I couldn't help but compare the technology to the red-light cameras being placed around the U.S. Many citizens are against such systems saying that they are invasive, and that they have the potential to be abused by law enforcement officers as a way of generating revenue. On the other hand, recent studies found that these red-light cameras can prevent accidents, and enforce good driving behavior (even at intersections without the cameras).

The license plate recognition falls in the same general category of monitoring vehicles and alerting police when something illegal occurs, and it seems as if both systems are working to their full potential. But my question is, does the license plate recognition technology fall into the same realm of being potentially invasive and abused? It seems they both walk the fine line of being useful, yet big brother-like.

In my opinion, I think both are helpful tools in reducing crime and accidents. I don't condone car theft or the running of red lights, and if there is a way of reducing the number of occurrences, I'm all for it. But in the back of my mind, I have to wonder if police could scan a license plate and see who it is, then pull them over based on something illegitimate. Maybe they knew that person and weren't fond of them, so they pull them over. I'm not saying all police officers would do this, but it's a thought.

What's your stance? Are the two traffic-related technologies similar, and do their purposes outweigh the potential to be abused?

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

is APNR new ?
By leexgx on 7/2/2011 7:51:44 PM , Rating: 2

APNR has been in the UK and other places for an bit now (any 4x4 , estate or unmarked cars norm have it in the UK)

norm used for no MOT, tax or insurance mainly, but also for drug or stolen tagging (car been reported to police for drug use so it gets an drug tag so the car gets checked when APNR in the car sees the number plate)

there are fixed APNR cam's as well (they are not speed cams) so when one enters an zone the any cop car can pull it over along the way if they have what ever tag is on the car (norm 4-5 i think)

there are avg speed cam APNR but they are norm only used when highway is been worked on (thankfully as most of us do 80-90MPH as we have small highways here there be very long que's if Avg speed cams was placed at some points)

i do not see what Red cam has to do with APNR (apart from catching them with no tax, MOT or insurance) i do not support red light cams (in the UK red/yellow light needs to be on longer then 2 secs, needs to be 5 secs) as i nearly got court out on one when i was behind an bus (i am not an red light runner)

the APNR does need an complete US data base with insurance company and state support for it to work correctly (and an Set US numberplate layout standard as UK all plates are the same US seem to just make there own up per state)

RE: is APNR new ?
By Johnmcl7 on 7/12/2011 6:07:57 PM , Rating: 2
To the US yes, we're 'lucky' in the UK to have an extensive automated speed camera network and ANPR usage although currently none of the automated cameras also do ANPR for other offences. I don't have a problem with the use of ANPR most of the time particularly as their main target is frequently those avoiding insurance but I think the Section 59 system is highly flawed. Under this system your car gets a marker (not the driver) which means it trips ANPR each time and you're likely to get pulled over far more often. Get two of these section 59's and your car is impounded. What's worrying is you can get a section 59 warning simply due to someone reporting you and there's no appeal procedure even if you've bought the car and it was the previous driver that got the warning, it's a struggle to get the market removed.

I have nothing against red light cameras either as I think running red lights is dangerous and should be prevented, the amber light is on for three seconds (plus or minus half a second) and from tests I've seen in the US (where apparently there have been debates on changing the amber time) on this issue a longer amber time doesn't make any difference in practice.


"This week I got an iPhone. This weekend I got four chargers so I can keep it charged everywhere I go and a land line so I can actually make phone calls." -- Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki