The problem is right now LPR data is available to just about everyone who wants it for any reason as long as they are part of law enforcement. They are using it, for example, to crack down on dissent, to stalk ex lovers, and to enforce abortion restrictions that are constitutionally dubious.

If we are to maintain our liberty, the vast power such a surveillance apparatus should either not exist or only be accessible through an adversarial court system (i.e. a search warrant).

(1) https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/how-cops-are-using-flo...

(2) https://local12.com/news/nation-world/police-chief-gets-caug...

(3) https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/10/flock-safety-and-texas...

The question though, surely can't be whether there's an expectation of privacy on public roads, but the total effect of knowing where people are at essentially all times through a combination of things like location data from phones, license plate readers, facial recognition etc.

Whether there is an expectation of privacy can't be what matters, what matters has to be whether the total effect allows a level of control that is dangerous or might have chilling effects on speech or on participation in things that are controversial.

People always talk about "no expectation of privacy in public." Ok, so would you support total universal surveillance of 100% of public space? Or a drone that perches outside your house when you are inside, and then follows and surveils you everywhere you go when you leave?

A better compromise is to require a warrant from a judge

Idk. Collective small harms vs individual harms.

Along a similar line, speed limits should be reduced to 35mph maximum for non-emergency traffic, it would save thousands of pointless deaths every year.

But the small harm of time wasted in traffic is -worth- the. sacrifice of thousands of lives, as it turn out.

How about GPS tracking for every step outside your house.

Would also help prevent and solve crimes. No privacy on public roads.

There is also something like proportionality.

> Just yesterday, flock helped police catch a dude

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

— Benjamin Franklin

Wrong metric-- the person caught would have almost certainly been caught absent it, making it easy to overstate the benefit.

When someone with access-- potentially LEO but the access set is much larger-- uses the data to stalk and harass someone you'll usually never know that the ALPR camera was the data source.

So its easy to overstate the contribution and understate the harm.

But if you talk a step back you can see the dramatic change being made to our world: making it impossible to go about your life without being constantly tracked, cataloged, and having your history made available to who knows who, for who knows what purpose, for who knows how long (but probably forever).

You don't have an expectation of privacy. I do. I don't want to go outside and have my every move recorded. There is something deeply disgusting about that notion.