During the September 20th Urbana City Council presentation on automatic license plate readers (ALPRs), a number of issues were raised about the lawfulness of broadly gathering data on the driving habits of every person in Urbana.
During the discussion, something happened that may very well set the stage for the entire ALPR project. When asked about 4th Amendment issues, Dan Murdock, a salesperson for ALPR supplier Flock Safety, did not know what the 4th Amendment was. Video below.
A more extensive article on Urbana’s ALPR consideration, along with the entire discussion video, can be viewed here:
Urbana Council to Consider License Plate Cameras and Vehicle Tracking System
Sigh. Another CheckCU article that sounds like The Onion yet is just reporting facts.
Surprising too was a salesman for a digital surveillance system having been in Illinois for 3 years, in over 40 cities- had ZERO statistics as to how many arrests could be attributed to these cameras- ZERO statistics as to how many arrests of shooters could be attributed to these cameras and ZERO statistics as to how much of a reduction in shots fired other cities are experiencing because of the cameras. Council was given two anecdotes of “this one time in Rantoul” and “this one time in Decatur.” I found anecdotes too: Vellejo, California’s ALRP’s misread “hits” 37% of the time. In Colorado, a woman and several children were handcuffed facedown on the concrete when an ALRP registered her SUV as a stolen motorcycle from out of state. Should we make a decision based on those anecdotes? And yet the mayor, the council person from Ward 3, the city administrator, and the police chief are selling the public that if we buy these cameras, we’ll catch the shooters and the shootings will lesson. But we have scant evidence that will be the case.