alt Hacker NewsFlock and ALPR usage is solved in USA if every state adopts New Hampshire's law:
* Illegal to collect every plate for later analysis
* Illegal to collect anything except for license plates (no drivers, pedestrians, etc.)
* Must delete "non hit" plate images within 3 minutes
* Strict forbidden to upload "non hit" camera imagery off the device
I would add that it should also require a warrant to access the ALPR data, but it's a great start.
Replies
I agree this is all good but you're missing one important point: if someone breaks the rules, there need to be clear and obvious prison sentences for the manufacturer and/or police involved, and a large payout to everyone who's data is affected, and large whistleblower rewards if you report such a crime.
This doesn't seem solved. You are getting rid of historical queries and the ability to search by cars and drivers. Swapping plates should not be a viable strategy in the year 2026.
The biggest argument against limits on storing "non-hit" data that the pro-Flock crowd is going to use is that "we need the historical data to find evidence of the whereabouts of criminal suspects".
Yep that solves everything. Pack your bags guys. War's over on ALPR's [sarcasm]
Making things illegal does not stop abuse. The cameras should not even be in our communities. There was 0 discussion nor any vote. These things got installed without consent and you want to argue that just placing guardrails that don't even get enforced is going to fix this?
The original sin is requiring cars to display an identifying plate. Imagine asking the framers about a similar ID display on horseback mounted travelers.
That's the underlying rights violation-- and it's why solutions that otherwise try to restrict ALPR run into oddities about limiting people's ability to observe what is plainly visible in public.
Failing that avenue, we should treat most broad involuntary data collection efforts as a form of stalking/harassment, and treat it accordingly-- including providing a strong civil path for anyone whose data was collected without their knoweldge especially given that law enforcement / prosecutors have a material conflict of interest which will prevent them from enforcing the law.
This assumes that you don’t get a new administration that decides to throw out all the laws that came before and uses this juicy panopticon camera system in whatever way they want, to do whatever they want.
The cameras are an attractive nuisance for people in power, including any and all law enforcement types. It only takes a few bad apples to spoil that entire ocean.
The real threat is the cameras’ very existence, and that is what has to be eliminated. If a thing doesn’t exist, then it can’t be abused.
That’s an important thing to keep in mind, when you are required to keep in mind the lessons of 1930s Germany. Or the Stasi from East Germany.
When you figure out how to guarantee that you can never, ever again have a 1930s Germany situation pop up, and a government that just casually throws out all the old laws, then we can talk about whether those kinds of cameras might make sense again.
Why is it okay to store it for 3 minutes?
If there is an actionable crime with a plate number, you can notify on realtime hits. Why store everything and allow them to go back in time?
Don’t even need to make that law, just make them ‘public records’, and when people start following the police chief, mayor, etc, those policies will change very, very quickly.