PDA

View Full Version : North Carolina, meet George Orwell.




GunnyFreedom
07-22-2014, 09:13 PM
North Carolina Senate tentatively approves bill to automatically track license plates around the State.

Passing the second reading (out of three) on a mostly mundane-reading HB348 (http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/BillLookUp/BillLookUp.pl?Session=2013&BillID=H348&votesToView=all) "Public Safety Equipment" acquired an ominous sounding Amendment (http://www.ncleg.net/Applications/BillLookUp/LoadBillDocument.aspx?SessionCode=2013&DocNum=9440&SeqNum=0) from one Senator Floyd McKissick (http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/members/viewMember.pl?sChamber=S&nUserID=228):

1 moves to amend the bill on page 1, line 4, by deleting "SYSTEM." and substituting "SYSTEM;
2 AND TO REGULATE THE USE OF AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READER
3 SYSTEMS."; and
4
5 on page 1, lines 17-18, by inserting the following new section between the lines:
6 "SECTION 2. Chapter 20 of the General Statutes is amended by adding a new
7 Article to read:
8 "Article 3D.
9 "Automatic License Plate Reader Systems.

A Democrat has proposed an amendment to adopt automated license plate tracking on North Carolina roadways, and his amendment passed, and then the bill containing it passed the North Carolina Senate on second reading (http://www.ncleg.net/gascripts/voteHistory/RollCallVoteTranscript.pl?sSession=2013&sChamber=S&RCS=1149) on July 16th.

You will not see this new text in the bill online. It is still buried in the amendment. You have to pull up Amendment 1 to read the road camera provision.

In England, on George Orwell's Birthday, thy put party hats on surveillance cameras.

http://img2u.info/img/g86a4d5bc.jpg

Is this what we are prepared to become? Because if so, then I will be in the market for a new home.

HB348 still has third reading to go; CONTACT YOUR STATE SENATOR NOW. then it has to go back to the house for Concurrence. CONTACT YOUR STATE HOUSE REP NOW. Kill this bill and send 1984 packing.

Mani
07-22-2014, 09:30 PM
and how much you want to bet certain officials will be exempt from this....

GunnyFreedom
07-22-2014, 09:38 PM
and how much you want to bet certain officials will be exempt from this....

Exempt? They will be on the side of the road photographing every car. Like Bill Clinton and all his mistresses, they don't need to be exempt.

Truth is this bill could very well die from running out of time. It is a disgusting bill in any case and it needs to be stopped.

TheTexan
07-22-2014, 09:40 PM
Shit like this doesn't really do anything new, it just does what the state is already doing a LOT more efficiently. Which is an especially scary thought, because from a statist point of view there really aren't any good arguments against improving the efficiency at which the state operates.

TheTexan
07-22-2014, 09:43 PM
http://retired.talkingpointsmemo.com/assets_c/2012/10/2012-10-29-montana-ad-anglers-libertarian-surveillance-cropped-proto-custom_28.jpg

HOLLYWOOD
07-22-2014, 10:55 PM
How much does this bill cost? Or is this another Central Powers DHS/et al Douches of Columbia fronting the stolen loot from federal debt/borrowing/taxes.


This is needed... so many damn terrorists all over NC.

phill4paul
07-23-2014, 03:45 AM
But where are you going to go Gunny? This is happening everywhere. It is only a matter of time until it is contiguous across AmeriKa.

For those that may not know their rep here is an interactive site: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/representation/whorepresentsme.aspx

Working Poor
07-23-2014, 04:25 AM
I bet they will pass it no matter how many people tell them not to.

Spikender
07-23-2014, 04:28 AM
Nice to know that in England instead of actually doing something about the surveillance state they do some stupid petty ass party hat bullshit.

How about putting a few rounds through the cameras instead of putting sparkly hats on them?

fisharmor
07-23-2014, 07:29 AM
Read the Amendment, folks.



"§ 20-183.23. Regulation of use.
Any State or local law enforcement agency using an automatic license plate reader system
must adopt a written policy governing its use before the automatic license plate reader system
is operational. The policy shall address all of the following:
(1) Databases used to compare data obtained by the automatic license plate
reader system.
(2) Data retention.
(3) Sharing of data with other law enforcement agencies.
(4) Training of automatic license plate reader system operators.
(5) Supervisory oversight of automatic license plate reader system use.
(6) Internal data security and accesss.
(7) Annual or more frequent auditing and reporting of automatic license plate
reader system use and effectiveness to the head of the agency responsible for
operating the system.
(8) Any other subjects related to automatic license plate reader system use by
the agency.
"§ 20-183.24. Preservation and disclosure of records.
(a) Data obtained by an automatic license plate reader system shall not be preserved for
more than 120 days unless there is a written, articulable, and recorded basis that the data has
intelligence or investigatory value, or is or may become evidence in a specific criminal action.
In that event, the specific case and parties involved shall be identified.
(b) Data obtained by an automatic license plate reader system is confidential and not a
public record as that term is defined in G.S. 132-1. Data shall not be disclosed except to a
federal, State, or local law enforcement agency for a legitimate law enforcement or public
safety purpose pursuant to a written request from the requesting agency. Written requests may
be in electronic format."



This isn't Orwellian, it's a Democrat trying to do what Democrats claim to want to do.
i.e., add some checks on the state as it metastasizes.
The assumption here is that the cameras are going to go up, which is bad, but he's trying to put restrictions on them.

Again, I'd be more pleased if the amendment said unequivocally that license plate readers were banned, but on the whole, this amendment isn't patently evil.

Slave Mentality
07-23-2014, 07:36 AM
Nice to know that in England instead of actually doing something about the surveillance state they do some stupid petty ass party hat bullshit.

How about putting a few rounds through the cameras instead of putting sparkly hats on them?

I support this and can guarantee these would not last a week out in the rural parts of the country. Just another reason to get out of the cities if at all possible. Mountain man living is sounding better and better each day. At least then all you have to worry about is drones, satellites, taxes, regulations out the ass, fees, permits, and all that liberty inspiring stuff. I understand the lure of the Alaskan wilderness fully.

Carlybee
07-23-2014, 07:52 AM
Somewhere out there is a company that makes license plate readers and they go around selling them. Sorta like drug companies selling drugs whether they are useful or bad is beside the point. They are either lobbying or making political donations as a means of marketing the product to legislators. Same with drones, same with military equip for police departments, etc etc ad nauseum. So...it didn't start with the politician..it started with a company looking to get a state government contract and a politician easily bought.. It's not like oh we need xyz..let's find someone to make it. Same concept behind Security cameras, red light cameras, and on a massive scale..War, Inc. Corporatism at it's finest.

Pericles
07-23-2014, 08:53 AM
Nice to know that in England instead of actually doing something about the surveillance state they do some stupid petty ass party hat bullshit.

How about putting a few rounds through the cameras instead of putting sparkly hats on them?
I shall have to post to the Times another scathing letter.

GunnyFreedom
07-23-2014, 09:44 AM
Read the Amendment, folks.




This isn't Orwellian, it's a Democrat trying to do what Democrats claim to want to do.
i.e., add some checks on the state as it metastasizes.
The assumption here is that the cameras are going to go up, which is bad, but he's trying to put restrictions on them.

Again, I'd be more pleased if the amendment said unequivocally that license plate readers were banned, but on the whole, this amendment isn't patently evil.

Regulation opens the door for everyone to take it up. This wasn't even addressed in statute before. Once the statutes open the door for regulation, then the door is opened for the things to be widely used.

This bill will probably fail.....this year. It's about to run out of time in the session before full passage. I will keep watching to make sure it stays dead this year, and then watch again as they will surely bring it back up next year.

My NC Senate primary opponent just messaged me on Facebook wants me to call him.

GunnyFreedom
07-23-2014, 09:47 AM
Somewhere out there is a company that makes license plate readers and they go around selling them. Sorta like drug companies selling drugs whether they are useful or bad is beside the point. They are either lobbying or making political donations as a means of marketing the product to legislators. Same with drones, same with military equip for police departments, etc etc ad nauseum. So...it didn't start with the politician..it started with a company looking to get a state government contract and a politician easily bought.. It's not like oh we need xyz..let's find someone to make it. Same concept behind Security cameras, red light cameras, and on a massive scale..War, Inc. Corporatism at it's finest.

Well sure, but all it takes is for politicians to refuse to be bought and the cycle couldn't perpetuate. Mind you, I do know how impossible that is, and so I have other plans for removing corporatism from government.

fisharmor
07-23-2014, 09:53 AM
Regulation opens the door for everyone to take it up.
I don't follow.
Absent regulation they can still take it up. And when they do, it will be without any self-imposed rules.
And besides, if they did pass a bill that said unequivocally "thou shalt not scan license plates", that's still technically regulation.

GunnyFreedom
07-23-2014, 10:07 AM
I don't follow.
Absent regulation they can still take it up. And when they do, it will be without any self-imposed rules.
And besides, if they did pass a bill that said unequivocally "thou shalt not scan license plates", that's still technically regulation.

Sure, they could, but in the absence of regulation they generally don't, because nobody wants to invest tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars into equipment that may or may not be legal next year. Once a regulatory provision and authority makes it into statute, THEN they know the environment they will be operating in, and are more free to make such equipment purchases.

GunnyFreedom
07-23-2014, 11:56 AM
Senator Thom Goolsby killed it in committee. One of the three Republicans to vote against the original Amendment.

presence
07-23-2014, 12:05 PM
http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii43/Thumper2413/Krylon1311.jpg


"thou shalt not scan license plates"

https://www.phantomplate.com/photoblocker.html
http://www.ontrackcorp.com/photo-stopper.cfm?id=06


Traffic cameras work because the background is reflective and the letters are not. Cheap solution = make everything matte= $5 Better solution = make everything reflective = $50. Good luck with that solution = lobby your government for less police state and less survelliance society.

Carlybee
07-23-2014, 12:07 PM
Well sure, but all it takes is for politicians to refuse to be bought and the cycle couldn't perpetuate. Mind you, I do know how impossible that is, and so I have other plans for removing corporatism from government.

I agree, yet we see even those we like sucking up for political gain or expediency.

Slave Mentality
07-23-2014, 01:34 PM
http://i261.photobucket.com/albums/ii43/Thumper2413/Krylon1311.jpg



https://www.phantomplate.com/photoblocker.html
http://www.ontrackcorp.com/photo-stopper.cfm?id=06


Traffic cameras work because the background is reflective and the letters are not. Cheap solution = make everything matte= $5 Better solution = make everything reflective = $50. Good luck with that solution = lobby your government for less police state and less survelliance society.

Can you look us up some of the James Bond flip tags? That would help me out more than lobbying anyone ever did. Bad attitude I know, but these red pillz taste like doo doo.

GunnyFreedom
07-23-2014, 01:40 PM
So, my State Senator Chad Barefoot asks me to get ahold of him, and he calls me back to talk about this bill.

He had a lot of encouraging things to say, but at the same time he was also telling me just about everything that I wanted to hear, and unlike so many voters I am perceptive of that. It is true that the privacy advocates like the ACLU were in favor of the amendment because it went from no regulation to full regulation, but it also expands their usage. The problem is that in 'real world' terms the uncertain state of non-regulation often suppresses a new surveillance technologies use more than finally defining the limits, whereupon municipalities and counties will expand to fill those limits.

We both expect the issue to come back in 2015, and Chad Barefoot has promised me that I will see this addressed in a digital privacy bill that I will like next year. That remains to be seen. This thread will serve as a solid marker into the 2015 Session. A simple search in February will bring it up. In the interim, I would like to brainstorm on digital privacy rights and how to put them into a digital privacy bill that would be effective at the State level and move us back towards liberty.

Keith and stuff
07-23-2014, 02:13 PM
But where are you going to go Gunny? This is happening everywhere. It is only a matter of time until it is contiguous across AmeriKa.

For those that may not know their rep here is an interactive site: http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/representation/whorepresentsme.aspx

It is only happening in 49 states. Widespread use of ALPR technology has been banned in New Hampshire since 2007. It was sponsored by a Republican in the Senate and passed the Democratically controlled Senate and Democratically controlled House. A Democratic governor signed it into law. The police tried to repeal the ban this year. The Democratically controlled NH House voted 250 to 97 against repealing the popular law, even though the sponsor of the bill was the House Majority Leader. NH is still the only state that has banned widespread use of this technology. Thankfully, some communities have abandoned it, like Boston, MA.

No need to give up if you don't like widespread use of this tech. You have two options. Move to New Hampshire or figure out what happened in NH/Boston/other cities and apply that to where you live.

https://fbcdn-sphotos-c-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-9/1521617_666598140050102_1110726045_n.jpg?oh=d73fca d0d55d8cf84577962399794113&oe=543478B2&__gda__=1412794198_beca80f837b0a740cb1af1b241baae3 b

Tod
07-23-2014, 02:21 PM
Gotta keep up with Tennessee!

devil21
07-23-2014, 02:24 PM
How much does this bill cost? Or is this another Central Powers DHS/et al Douches of Columbia fronting the stolen loot from federal debt/borrowing/taxes.


This is needed... so many damn terrorists all over NC.

Charlotte got all of their license plate scanners as part of the 'security' build-up to the 2012 DNC. All provided gratis by the feds. They're all over the place and they stand out because they look different than most surveillance cameras. Afaik they aren't in use yet....probably just waiting on this bill to pass.



Read the Amendment, folks.




This isn't Orwellian, it's a Democrat trying to do what Democrats claim to want to do.
i.e., add some checks on the state as it metastasizes.
The assumption here is that the cameras are going to go up, which is bad, but he's trying to put restrictions on them.

Again, I'd be more pleased if the amendment said unequivocally that license plate readers were banned, but on the whole, this amendment isn't patently evil.

I'd call it codifying the use of gov't tracking without warrants but ymmv.

LibForestPaul
07-23-2014, 05:11 PM
paint ball guns = 200ft per second.

black, hard to photograph thru black paint

presence
07-23-2014, 05:14 PM
Can you look us up some of the James Bond flip tags? That would help me out more than lobbying anyone ever did. Bad attitude I know, but these red pillz taste like doo doo.

Call it done homie!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YP5yC1wERpw

http://plate-flipper.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Electric-Powered-License-Plate-Frame/dp/B001TLLZ4E

https://www.hornblasters.com/products/details.php?i=license-plate-flipper

http://www.hidetheplate.com/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FN_wcDgDWwc


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JurKU0BQYOM

aclove
07-23-2014, 06:42 PM
This bill was killed today by the NC Senate Rules Committee. Big ups to Senator Thom Goolsby for leading the fight against this.

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/07/23/4024173/roadside-cameras-bill-dies.html

Kenso
07-23-2014, 11:04 PM
Plate scanning is already here in various NC municipalities. Too late basically unless someone passes a bill banning them.

http://www.wect.com/story/21430456/wrightsville-beach-officers-propose-new-license-plates-scanning-system

Keith and stuff
07-24-2014, 12:04 AM
Plate scanning is already here in various NC municipalities. Too late basically unless someone passes a bill banning them.


Not just NC. It is common in 49 states! If someone wants to ban it in their state or city, the groundwork has already been laid in NH and Boston. Just learn what we did and follow our lead. It's been banned for 7 years where I live and that's still the popular position of the masses. This is a winning issue for candidates!

FindLiberty
07-24-2014, 06:38 PM
Strike at the root through the legislative process, not like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wrmXoQN0a3U

DFF
07-24-2014, 07:02 PM
Plate scanning....what's next? Chips implanted like Aaron Russo said?

Pericles
07-26-2014, 08:32 PM
Can you look us up some of the James Bond flip tags? That would help me out more than lobbying anyone ever did. Bad attitude I know, but these red pillz taste like doo doo.

I know they are tough to find, but subsonic .22 LR should do the do nicely.

Keith and stuff
07-26-2014, 08:39 PM
Plate scanning....what's next? Chips implanted like Aaron Russo said?
Unelected bureaucrats in Texas have moved forward with the next step. They have created a statewide database for everyone in Texas and they intend on putting everyone's face and all 10 finger prints of everyone in the database. It is much worse than the widespread use of automatic license plate readers. Unfortunately, that is also legal in Texas. It also has red light cameras, I believe :( http://www.photoenforced.com/texas.html

Pericles
07-26-2014, 08:48 PM
Unelected bureaucrats in Texas have moved forward with the next step. They have created a statewide database for everyone in Texas and they intend on putting everyone's face and all 10 finger prints of everyone in the database. It is much worse than the widespread use of automatic license plate readers. Unfortunately, that is also legal in Texas. It also has red light cameras, I believe :( http://www.photoenforced.com/texas.html

Noe try - that is a DHS program

phill4paul
07-26-2014, 08:54 PM
Unelected bureaucrats in Texas have moved forward with the next step. They have created a statewide database for everyone in Texas and they intend on putting everyone's face and all 10 finger prints of everyone in the database. It is much worse than the widespread use of automatic license plate readers. Unfortunately, that is also legal in Texas. It also has red light cameras, I believe :( http://www.photoenforced.com/texas.html

Just a heads up... the 10 finger prints are at this point voluntary though you will not be told this. I expect it to quietly become mandatory in the next coupla years.


The amendments also refer to 521.042(b), which states the following:
(b) The application must include:
(1) the thumbprints of the applicant or, if thumbprints cannot be taken, the index fingerprints of the applicant;
So, there's no legal backing to Vinger's claims. Sure, the DPS is technically permitted to collect all 10 prints, but only because nothing specifically forbids this practice. But the law does not demand all 10 prints be provided in order to obtain a license or identification card. The law only asks for thumbprints or index prints.

This is why it was rolled out quietly. The DPS has no legal "authority" to demand a full set of prints before handing out a license. What it can do, however, is ask for them. At this point, supplying a full set of prints is purely voluntary. The DPS can't prevent you from obtaining a license if you refuse, but the whole system is set up to make it appear as though it's mandatory.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140721/09452027954/texas-dept-public-safety-quietly-starts-demanding-full-set-prints-drivers-license-applicants.shtml

Keith and stuff
07-26-2014, 09:21 PM
Just a heads up... the 10 finger prints are at this point voluntary though you will not be told this. I expect it to quietly become mandatory in the next coupla years.

https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140721/09452027954/texas-dept-public-safety-quietly-starts-demanding-full-set-prints-drivers-license-applicants.shtml

There are many articles about it being required, even though requiring it is against the law. The people doing it don't care about the law. They want to arrest you and I and everyone living in Texas and will break whatever laws that have to if it means they can expand the prison population! Or maybe they just don't want liberty people to ever vote again? Is this really Rick Perry's idea? Like how he is against open carry except for government workers. Sorry, maybe I'm getting carried away :toady:

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/23/texas-is-now-taking-a-full-set-of-fingerprints-for-drivers-licenses-but-is-this-legal-plus-the-other-states-that-do-it/

http://wwlp.com/2014/07/19/dps-requiring-all-10-fingerprints-when-drivers-renew-license/

http://www.newsmax.com/US/texas-fingerprinting-residents-legality/2014/07/15/id/582896/

http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2014/07/judge-for-yourself-if-fingerprint-taking-is-necessary-for-texas-drivers-licenses.html/

phill4paul
07-26-2014, 09:31 PM
There are many articles about it being required, even though requiring it is against the law. The people doing it don't care about the law. They want to arrest you and I and everyone living in Texas and will break whatever laws that have to if it means they can expand the prison population! Or maybe they just don't want liberty people to ever vote again? Is this really Rick Perry's idea? Like how is against open carry except for government workers.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2014/07/23/texas-is-now-taking-a-full-set-of-fingerprints-for-drivers-licenses-but-is-this-legal-plus-the-other-states-that-do-it/

http://wwlp.com/2014/07/19/dps-requiring-all-10-fingerprints-when-drivers-renew-license/

http://www.newsmax.com/US/texas-fingerprinting-residents-legality/2014/07/15/id/582896/

http://thescoopblog.dallasnews.com/2014/07/judge-for-yourself-if-fingerprint-taking-is-necessary-for-texas-drivers-licenses.html/

Sounds to me like a Texas activist needs to challenge it and if refused a license take it to court.

Carlybee
07-26-2014, 09:34 PM
Who decides these laws?

Pericles
07-27-2014, 07:22 AM
Who decides these laws?

They are not laws. they are regulations, which is even more perfidious.

http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/privacy_pia_cbp_nii_jan2014.pdf

Part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s (CBP) mission is to facilitate legitimate international trade. The Non -Intrusive Inspection (NII) Systems Program furthers this mission by providing technologies to inspect and screen conveyances or cars, trucks, railcars, sea containers, as well as personal luggage, packages, parcels, and flat mail through either x-ray or gamma-ray imaging systems . CBP Officers use NII systems to help them effectively and efficiently detect and prevent contraband, including drugs, unreported currency, guns, ammunition, and other illegal merchandise, as well as inadmissible persons, from being smuggled into the United States, while having a minimal impact on the flow of legitimate travel and commerce. The imaging system used on the conveyance itself collects photographic and other images that may contain personally identifiable information (PII) , such as vehicle identifiers (e.g. license plate numbers). CBP is conducting this Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA) pursuant to Section 208 of the E-Government Act of 2002 1, because NII systems use information technology to collect, maintain, and disseminate PII in the form of scanned, photographic, or video images. However, NII cannot retrieve the PII by personal identifier (e.g., name); therefore use of NII does not require CBP to conduct a system of records notice pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974.