It’s clear to me that these networked license plate cameras represent a fundamental impingement on freedom.

Just one example: how is a journalist supposed to meet with a secret source if their locations at all times are logged?

Even if these databases are only ever searched investigating violations of laws, it’s trivial to find ways to twist that against political rivals, protesters and activists, ex girlfriends, journalists, and leakers.

▲

maerF0x0 9 hours ago | parent [-]

What freedom is being impinged? AFAIK we have no fundamental right to not being recorded in public, presuming it's not indecent.

And I'd reiterate what i said elsewhere:

I believe people respond to incentives. What we need are more laws governing the law makers and law enforcers. It maybe trivial to shoplift, but the laws (when enforced) make it irrational to.

	▲	kennywinker 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> What freedom is being impinged? Freedoms guaranteed by the 1st amendment: Freedom of the press - by harassing or criminalizing journalists who seek to expose gov or politicians who do wrong. Freedom of assembly - license plate readers have been used to mass collect plates from people attending political rallies for mainstream candidates. Freedom of speech and petition - tracking and harassing people for political speech or peaceful protest. Under the second amendment: Right to keep and bear arms. See feds slurping up data on gun show attendees. Doing something that is a basic right should not land you in a gov crime database. Under the 4th: Protection against unreasonable searches and seizures. Knowing where someone is at all times is an unreasonable search. And of course the supreme court has ruled that there is no basic right to privacy in the constitution, when they overturned roe v wade, but i strongly disagree with that ruling and believe it was not fair or consistent with the intent of the constitution.