> car, location & face recognition could achieve the same ends, by and large. (China already does this). Yeah, I actually started out writing that comment abou

> car, location & face recognition could achieve the same ends, by and large. (China already does this). Yeah, I actually started out writing that comment about how license plates are probably unnecessary given the volume of other forms of location data accessible to LE but the peak HN strat was more fun to think about. > We haven’t yet established that being able to identify someone in public is bad, or conversely that being able to travel anonymously is a goal we want, right? I don't have full answers here, but I think it's worth considering the modes of enforcement enabled by this change. Despite there being no de jure change in privacy protections while in public, there's been a de facto change from that kind of data only being accessible in cases of specific, targeted investigations to that kind of data being accessible to automated dragnet enforcement. Targeted investigations are inherently limited in scale and there's (at least theoretically) a nexus between the investigation and some kind of probable cause, but dragnet enforcement generally disregards fourth-amendment protections. The Carpenter decision theoretically offers some protection against this, but parallel construction is trivial enough that I'm not exactly resting easy. So, I think it is possible to be against ALPRs without necessarily being for wholly anonymous travel in public - it's an issue of probable cause and avoiding the fruit of the poisoned tree, not one of absolute lawlessness. My (admittedly silly) suggestion is also problematic because it doesn't address this concern at all. My real feelings are a lot closer to 'calvinmorrison, but I acknowledge that "just get rid of license plates" isn't exactly a winning proposition to the average voter.