The police are to expand a car surveillance operation that will allow them to record and store details of millions of daily journeys for up to five years. A national network of roadside cameras will be able to “read” 50 million license plates a day, enabling officers to reconstruct the journeys of motorists.

Police have been encouraged to “fully and strategically exploit” the database, which is already recording the whereabouts of 10 million drivers a day, during investigations ranging from counter-terrorism to low-level crime.

But it has raised concerns from civil rights campaigners, who question whether the details should be kept for so long, and want clearer guidance on who might have access to the material.

The project relies on automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras to pinpoint the precise time and location of all vehicles on the road. Senior officers had promised the data would be stored for two years. But responding to inquiries under the Freedom of Information Act, the Home Office has admitted the data is now being kept for five years.

Police helicopters have been equipped with infrared cameras that can read licence plates from 610 metres (2,000ft).

As much as American have fought tooth and nail to keep what civil liberties we have remaining – from the onslaught of so-called patriots and other cowards – the Brits apparently have fewer defenders and less courage.

Certainly, they’re on their way to less freedom.




  1. GigG says:

    It amazes me that some people think that what they do on a public street is in any way private.

  2. alphanumeric says:

    You seem to forget that Amercans didn’t have car bombs going off with regularity in your capitol city, unlike London did during the height of the conflict with the IRA.

    Sorry but comparing American to British security needs is like comparing apples to oranges and is disambiguous at best.

  3. LibertyLover says:

    #1, It doesn’t have so much to do with privacy as it has to do with misuse of the information.

    What if you started visiting a location that was owned or frequented by a political enemy of of the guy currently in power? You might find yourself on the wrong side of some situation. This would violate your right to freely associate, however subtle the problem might be.

    What if you showed up a protest rally and the government decided to start cracking down on people who visited there (like putting them on the no-fly list)? It would be too easy for those in power to generate a list of everybody who went there.

    Just because you are in a public place, that doesn’t void your right to expect privacy.

  4. Greg Samsa says:

    The government wants more information to “keep us safe”. What a crock. The more power we cede to the government, the more peril we place ourselves in.

    Power WILL be misused.

    Read that again.

    Now, read this: information IS power.

    2+2=4. Night follows day. What goes up, must come down.

    We are in serious trouble. Wake up. And no, we cannot vote our way out of it. McCain, Obama? Who cares? There IS NO lesser evil.

  5. Montanaguy says:

    #2
    “…paranoia strikes deep…into your heart it will creep…”
    “..like looking in your mirror and seeing a police car…”
    Elaborate please – exactly what do you think your privacy rights are in a public place? Private and public do seem to be mutually contradictory terms, do they not? I think it’s an interesting topic. The constitution doesn’t specifically promise privacy, although various supreme court decisions have flitted around the edges of the issue.

  6. Springheel Jack says:

    The government will never read my email. Thank you, GnuPG.

  7. LibertyLover says:

    Elaborate please – exactly what do you think your privacy rights are in a public place?

    I believe I explained that in my previous post. There is no way to prevent that information from being misused. As that is the case, it should not be collected.

    To further elaborate, every one one of the following is in danger of falling should the wrong administration come to power with access to that type of information:

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    Described above.

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    “I need to know how many people went to the gun shop last year. How many of them made repeated trips? How many of them went to the gun show?”

    Etc.

    The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

    Probably cause is a fine line. How many “checkpoints” have been set up to check valid driver licenses only to be really looking for drunk drivers? Yes, drunk driving is bad, but you’ve just opened a whole new can worms with the ability track people in this fashion. “I need a list of everybody who visits a bar more than twice a week. Find a reason to pull them over and sniff their breath.”

    Call me paranoid, but the Signers didn’t do it in public. They had to sneak around to sign the Declaration of Independence because the British would have shot them on sight. Because of THEIR paranoia, we have the country we do. Paranoia keeps a man alive and free.

  8. MikeN says:

    Why do you guys hate technology so much?

  9. MikeN says:

    I thought it was right-wingers like George Bush that pass things like this?

  10. Montanaguy says:

    #9
    Don’t hate technology at all..just pointing out how it removes privacy without your awareness…unless you are…paranoid.

  11. Montanaguy says:

    #12
    The liberals are mad about everything. Hate seeking an object…

  12. bobbo says:

    This demonstrates the gap between our right to privacy vs the desire for anonymity. Traditionally, a legal activity is allowed even if it can lead to illegality, the slippery slope must be taken to the bottom of the hill before public surveillance is to be ruled illegal.

    Burdens and benefits both societal and individual to any action taken and not taken. Like our military, our government loves tech to punish/monitor evil doers rather than spend the same money to prevent the motivation for many crimes to begin with.

    With total monitoring, imagine how many can be in jail for drug abuses rather than making drugs legal, and so forth. Course with total monitoring, parole and probation programs could be greatly expanded. I’d bet the human possibilities never get implemented. We are still too judgmental, punitive, and hypocritical in our righteousness.

  13. chris says:

    Desperation is the British way….

    If you look at the history of the Empire in the colonies there was an amazing disregard for any rights of the populace. Times are hard, and they only have the home territory. Canada and Australia are much more live and let live. When the warlike man has no enemies he turns on himself.

  14. Montanaguy says:

    bobbo, your comment is thought-provoking – maybe the terms of the argument are wrong, as you suggest in a way. We’re discussing privacy, which I feel we gave up a long time ago; but perhaps anonymity is the last thing we cling to, even in public. Thus, people act out in places like Las Vegas, although they are still in public, as opposed to back home in the town square, where they are not anonymous. Maybe I’m just blathering. But, it’s anonymous. Unless tht’s you over there in the corner, bobbo, with your packet sniffer. Are you the cross-dresser with the platform heels sipping a double-tall? And the McCain pin on your Chairman Mao hat?

  15. ECA says:

    For every camera on the public, I WANT ONE following our leaders and the COPS..
    I want access tot he data base also..
    I want to catch THOSE FEW LEADERS, running stop signs..I want to catch them driving without insurance.. i want to see them HIT and run..
    I want to catch EVERY COP driving home after work, hitting the BAR, and NOT GETTING A TICKET.

  16. ECA says:

    Or do you THINK, that the privileged WILL BE OMITTED??

  17. Grimbo says:

    I consider myself an average British guy, I meet all the criteria for being Mr. average – home, wife, 2 cars, 2 kids, decent income.

    I’m really not bothered by all this surveillance… I consider myself unlikely to ever be handicapped by it and I certainly have nothing to hide! Why should I be frightened by it?

    If it helps put one scumbag in prison or stops someone getting mugged one night then bring them on!

    For some reason, Americans always get more uptight about this than the British do!

    I would much rather have CCTV to “keep us safe” than have everyone carrying guns to “keep us safe”.

  18. bobbo says:

    #16–montanna==sipping the double tall would be my only sin and I was pretty public about that. Course, other sins not on your list were done in private, including a goodly portion of my posts on this blog. A lot of church going folks think I’m religious because I’m existential.

  19. Montanaguy says:

    #17
    Like congressman Kennedy crashing his car on capitol hill? Where’s the video of that, by the way?

  20. Bruno says:

    It isn’t a case of us not having as many defenders…it is a case of us not caring as much…a lot of us Brits have the belief that if you aren’t doing anything wrong, what does it matter if there is a database of all your activities?

  21. brendal says:

    Um…one of the reasons we rebelled, remember??

  22. deowll says:

    Big brother is watching you.

    It’s very simple. Once they know every thing about you including where you are at and exactly what you are doing all the time they will only allow you to do what they consider to be the correct thing.

    Anything they don’t approve of is the wrong thing.

    I don’t won’t to be property but if it makes you happy go for it.

  23. Montanaguy says:

    Of course, the liberals, with their agenda of pushing ‘hate crime’ initiatives, would be the most interested in surveillance. Hate crimes, ultimately being any form of speech that libs disapprove of, would require every person to have an IP address that the political correctness police could monitor in real time. We’re almost there, even kindergartners are feeling it. The libs in our town have pushed the agenda to the ridiculous point of disallowing ANY physical contact between teacher and student, so the innocent kindergartner gets rebuffed for giving the teacher a parting hug at the school door. Common sense is on permanent vacation. We can’t profile hijackers but we can sure monitor teachers.

  24. Glenn E. says:

    One of these decades, the “terrorists” will be the common people. Fighting to get back some control of the things they need to survive with. Like clean water, air, and heating fuel. And all of this fine technology will be in place to protect this stuff, for the super rich to cash in on its high price tag. Along with those mercenary armies our government helped finance. Yep, I think they’re getting ready to defend these things against the hungry hordes. And not from a few random towelheads.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 5680 access attempts in the last 7 days.