4 ms·

> The misuse of license plate data wouldn't make my top ten list of potential powers that law enforcement might abuse. Are you sure about that? How about if y

> The misuse of license plate data wouldn't make my top ten list of potential powers that law enforcement might abuse. Are you sure about that? How about if your license plate were stolen without your knowledge, placed on another vehicle of the same make and model, then photographed leaving the scene of a crime?

veec_cas_tant 2mo ago
Yes, I find that quite unpersuasive. Should we not allow the analysis of hair found at crime scenes because someone might steal some of my hair and place it there? Someone framing me in this manner is incredibly unlikely, would be disproven by the other broad investigative powers afforded to law enforcement, and, at least in my opinion, is ridiculously less likely than the cameras photographing real criminals. And that doesn't even take into account that camera footage is already collected from homes and businesses, just very inefficiently.
- AdieuToLogic 2mo ago
  > Should we not allow the analysis of hair found at crime scenes because someone might steal some of my hair and place it there? First, I never implied disallowing analysis at a crime scene. What I described is a realistic activity criminals do in order to disguise their identity. Second, "stealing your hair" is a very different thing than stealing license plates off of your vehicle. This should be obvious. > Someone framing me in this manner is incredibly unlikely, would be disproven by the other broad investigative powers afforded to law enforcement, and, at least in my opinion, is ridiculously less likely than the cameras photographing real criminals. The point is that it would be you having to defend yourself for something you did not do. Could you successfully do so? Maybe. It depends on what the crime was and if you could afford a skilled enough lawyer. And therein lies the rub. You would have to drop tens-of-thousands of dollars in defense of your not being one of the "real criminals." Because the police are not going to sit there and say, "gee wiz, veec_cas_tant could not possibly be a 'real criminal' because they said they are being framed!" They are going to say, "we can place you at the scene of the crime."
  - veec_cas_tant 2mo ago
    > First, I never implied disallowing analysis at a crime scene You weren't implying that video evidence of a car should be off-limits to the police? If stealing hair is too hardcore for a criminal, just use your example and imagine that, instead of having the plate captured on camera, they find it at the scene of a vehicular homicide. Should that license plate be investigated, or should it be off-limits? In this example, as the victim of a stolen license plate, I think I should be quite happy with numerous high-definition cameras that can help prove my case.
    - AdieuToLogic 2mo ago
      >> First, I never implied disallowing analysis at a crime scene > You weren't implying that video evidence of a car should be off-limits to the police? No, I did not. A car is not a crime scene. Neither is "video evidence of a car" a crime scene. > If stealing hair is too hardcore for a criminal ... What I wrote was: Second, "stealing your hair" is a very different thing than stealing license plates off of your vehicle. This should be obvious. If you cannot see the difference between someone taking an attachment from a vehicle unbeknownst to you and being in your presence to take hair off of your head, then there is no reality which we share. > ... just use your example and imagine that, instead of having the plate captured on camera, they find it at the scene of a vehicular homicide. Then that would be entirely different than your original assertion, which was: The misuse of license plate data wouldn't make my top ten list of potential powers that law enforcement might abuse. Wouldn't it? > Should that license plate be investigated, or should it be off-limits? What are you even talking about? You said license plate data "wouldn't make my top ten". When did I raise the question about license plates being investigated or off-limits?
      - veec_cas_tant 2mo ago
        Must be a misunderstanding here. You said: > How about if your license plate were stolen without your knowledge, placed on another vehicle of the same make and model, then photographed leaving the scene of a crime? > You would have to drop tens-of-thousands of dollars in defense of your not being one of the "real criminals." Because the police are not going to sit there and say, "gee wiz, veec_cas_tant could not possibly be a 'real criminal' because they said they are being framed!" But are claiming: > A car is not a crime scene. Neither is "video evidence of a car" a crime scene... When did I raise the question about license plates being investigated or off-limits? It might be easier if you just stated your actual view instead of playing twenty questions, because I have tried to read your posts from multiple angles and can't find any way to reconcile them. If you aren't arguing against the use of camera footage of cars in police investigations, why bring up the stolen plate scenario, along with the legal costs of defending against it, in the first place? Just to be clear: I would be absolutely fine with law enforcement investigating the appearance of my stolen plates at a crime scene using video footage obtained from private or public cameras. Police using camera footage to investigate a crime scene is not at all a misuse, and I think everybody would be happy that there was footage of the crime.

veec_cas_tant 2mo ago

Yes, I find that quite unpersuasive. Should we not allow the analysis of hair found at crime scenes because someone might steal some of my hair and place it there? Someone framing me in this manner is incredibly unlikely, would be disproven by the other broad investigative powers afforded to law enforcement, and, at least in my opinion, is ridiculously less likely than the cameras photographing real criminals. And that doesn't even take into account that camera footage is already collected from homes and businesses, just very inefficiently.

AdieuToLogic 2mo ago
> Should we not allow the analysis of hair found at crime scenes because someone might steal some of my hair and place it there? First, I never implied disallowing analysis at a crime scene. What I described is a realistic activity criminals do in order to disguise their identity. Second, "stealing your hair" is a very different thing than stealing license plates off of your vehicle. This should be obvious. > Someone framing me in this manner is incredibly unlikely, would be disproven by the other broad investigative powers afforded to law enforcement, and, at least in my opinion, is ridiculously less likely than the cameras photographing real criminals. The point is that it would be you having to defend yourself for something you did not do. Could you successfully do so? Maybe. It depends on what the crime was and if you could afford a skilled enough lawyer. And therein lies the rub. You would have to drop tens-of-thousands of dollars in defense of your not being one of the "real criminals." Because the police are not going to sit there and say, "gee wiz, veec_cas_tant could not possibly be a 'real criminal' because they said they are being framed!" They are going to say, "we can place you at the scene of the crime."
- veec_cas_tant 2mo ago
  > First, I never implied disallowing analysis at a crime scene You weren't implying that video evidence of a car should be off-limits to the police? If stealing hair is too hardcore for a criminal, just use your example and imagine that, instead of having the plate captured on camera, they find it at the scene of a vehicular homicide. Should that license plate be investigated, or should it be off-limits? In this example, as the victim of a stolen license plate, I think I should be quite happy with numerous high-definition cameras that can help prove my case.
  - AdieuToLogic 2mo ago
    >> First, I never implied disallowing analysis at a crime scene > You weren't implying that video evidence of a car should be off-limits to the police? No, I did not. A car is not a crime scene. Neither is "video evidence of a car" a crime scene. > If stealing hair is too hardcore for a criminal ... What I wrote was: Second, "stealing your hair" is a very different thing than stealing license plates off of your vehicle. This should be obvious. If you cannot see the difference between someone taking an attachment from a vehicle unbeknownst to you and being in your presence to take hair off of your head, then there is no reality which we share. > ... just use your example and imagine that, instead of having the plate captured on camera, they find it at the scene of a vehicular homicide. Then that would be entirely different than your original assertion, which was: The misuse of license plate data wouldn't make my top ten list of potential powers that law enforcement might abuse. Wouldn't it? > Should that license plate be investigated, or should it be off-limits? What are you even talking about? You said license plate data "wouldn't make my top ten". When did I raise the question about license plates being investigated or off-limits?
    - veec_cas_tant 2mo ago
      Must be a misunderstanding here. You said: > How about if your license plate were stolen without your knowledge, placed on another vehicle of the same make and model, then photographed leaving the scene of a crime? > You would have to drop tens-of-thousands of dollars in defense of your not being one of the "real criminals." Because the police are not going to sit there and say, "gee wiz, veec_cas_tant could not possibly be a 'real criminal' because they said they are being framed!" But are claiming: > A car is not a crime scene. Neither is "video evidence of a car" a crime scene... When did I raise the question about license plates being investigated or off-limits? It might be easier if you just stated your actual view instead of playing twenty questions, because I have tried to read your posts from multiple angles and can't find any way to reconcile them. If you aren't arguing against the use of camera footage of cars in police investigations, why bring up the stolen plate scenario, along with the legal costs of defending against it, in the first place? Just to be clear: I would be absolutely fine with law enforcement investigating the appearance of my stolen plates at a crime scene using video footage obtained from private or public cameras. Police using camera footage to investigate a crime scene is not at all a misuse, and I think everybody would be happy that there was footage of the crime.