Video: High Speed License Plate Monitoring

Published on July 31st, 2007

This will make it a lot easier for police to find people with stolen cars, no insurance, no license, no registration, vehicle used in crime, etc.

46 users responded in " Video: High Speed License Plate Monitoring "

Subscribe to this post comment rss or trackback url

# 1 bobbo said, on July 31st, 2007 at 4:52 pm

Gee, how come cameras are so closely associatid with crime fighting and invasion of privacy?

Why can’t I park my stolen vehicle without the cops getting involved?

Is this legal if I’m fondling myself in the back seat?

# 2 Rick said, on July 31st, 2007 at 5:01 pm

It is never the “good” reasons we develop a technology that is the problem…it is what we do with this stuff that frightens me.

# 3 Lou S. said, on July 31st, 2007 at 5:10 pm

I don’t have a problem, necessarily with the technology. I just believe we need to limit, by force of law, exactly what can be used with the information, and never let it be used for things, we, the citizens of this country don’t want. We need to put real barriers in the slippery slope argument, so that technology can be used to get the real bad guys.

# 4 edwinrogers said, on July 31st, 2007 at 5:41 pm

A stalker’s dream gadget.

# 5 Scott Heron said, on July 31st, 2007 at 5:42 pm

So, if my license gets suspended and my wife drives my car for any reason.. how many times will she be harassed under suspicion of driving on a suspended license. I’m sure she would love to have a team of officers waiting on her to exit the mall after they read the plate in the parking lot.

# 6 Jägermeister said, on July 31st, 2007 at 6:14 pm

In a couple of years you’ll have the same capability for facial recognition.

# 7 Micromike said, on July 31st, 2007 at 6:43 pm

More cute toys for Big Brother all in the name of making you feel safe. If all criminals were given cell phones the FBI etc. could track them 24/7 through the GPS function like they do the rest of us.

Might as well get used to the idea the government knows where we are all the time because it won’t be long till they do.

# 8 WTL said, on July 31st, 2007 at 7:01 pm

I’m just wondering why he isn’t wearing his seat belt.

# 9 B. Dog said, on July 31st, 2007 at 7:04 pm

Tip: Drive the back streets.

# 10 Jägermeister said, on July 31st, 2007 at 7:12 pm

Or get a Foxplate.

# 11 Richard said, on July 31st, 2007 at 7:39 pm

As a retired police officer. I have personally found a stolen car right after it was used in a crime, sitting in a parking area where we found out it was where the robber was to hit next. You can go into any DMV and get the owners inforation on any license plate. Also, if the registered owner is a man and he is suspended, the the cop getting the hit on the license plate would not pull the woman over. We are not that stupid. And there is no expectation of privacy in a car. A cargo van or RV maybe, but a car, No
Used incorrectly, this could be a huge problem. But we had video and ever computer key stroke made in the squad car was recorded. I ran the plate of a car only to find the FBI at my station after my shift to find out why I ran their under cover car’s plate. This can be great to reduce revoked driving and insurance rates due to stolen cars.

# 12 Patrick Campbell said, on July 31st, 2007 at 7:44 pm

Amazing…seriously ..you people putting this project down…do you have warrants? unpaid tickets? Really guys, this is an amazing tool for law enforcement to use against the people that really need to be caught. It’s not like it’s big brother putting away his political enemies, or minorities being chased down or something…it’s a system that once tested and ironed out, could absolutely change the law enforcement, and in doing so our society. After thorough testing of the system I’m sure it will for example… be mostly focused on looking for people with warrants or driving stolen vehicles. IS THAT SO BAD!? As far as things like people with suspended lisences…..if this system has been in use for any lenght of time that little error in the design has probably been worked out already. I personally feel that this system could prove useful in ALL areas. I find it it rather funny that it seems to be a purely Canadian thing. Canada is my home turf and well…..lets just say it’ll be used for more unpaid speeding tickets than solving serious crimes in most areas of our very large “little country”…but at the end of the day if you really care about the security of where you live and where your children grow up…you should see that this is a truly good instrument of carrying out the law.

# 13 TIHZ_HO said, on July 31st, 2007 at 8:13 pm

WELL DONE CANADA! Keep up the good fight!

#5 Well duh – don’t get your license suspended as your wife is going to kill you!

#7 Action – reaction! If there wasn’t a need for it then there wouldn’t be a system to detect it.

#12 Could not agree with you more!

My wife and I live in totalitarian China. A Chinese version of COPS would be a boring as hell TV show.

Just a thought, of topic. If guns don’t kill people, because people kill people then get rid of the people…

Cheers

# 14 tallwookie said, on July 31st, 2007 at 8:58 pm

meh

# 15 C0D3R said, on July 31st, 2007 at 9:33 pm

When deployed in mobile units, as previously stated they have been in Florida, this is no worse than LEO driving with one hand while tapping license plate numbers within sight using a keyboard with the other hand.

This is an officer safety issue (two hands at ten and two freeing a pair of well trained eyes to look at everything else on and around the road except the ascend of neighboring cars.

Plus, the recognition for highest number of recovered stolen vehicles will no longer be awarded to the fastest and most adept one handed typist in the troop.

# 16 mh said, on July 31st, 2007 at 10:50 pm

In Japan, fixed cameras for license plate surveillance is already deployed over main streets nationwide. Police is, for years, using it to catch various kind of criminals, and, uh, non-criminals. You can guess.

# 17 Mister Mustard said, on August 1st, 2007 at 1:14 am

>>I’m sure it will for example… be mostly focused on looking
>>for people with warrants or driving stolen vehicles.

Hardy har har! Yeah, riiiiiiiiiiiiiight. That’s what ‘berto Gonzalez said.

After all, if you’ve got nothing to hide, then you should have to problem if we put a web cam in your bedroom, in your bathroom, and wiretap your phones. Right?

“If we can’t monitor your every move, the terrorists win!”

# 18 Steve said, on August 1st, 2007 at 3:54 am

#17 Finally someone sees it for what it is, another slide down that slippery slope.

I don’t have anything to hide but that isn’t the point. I don’t want someone watching my every move. I get sick and tired of the bullshit about “nothing to hide” “nothing to hide”. Sounds like the Andy Griffith show when Gomer was yelling “citizens arrest, citizens arrest”.

How about locking them up if they drive on a suspended license or without insurance. I could save enough to buy that Jag I want if I didn’t have to pay for insurance and could drive without it.

# 19 Proud Canadian said, on August 1st, 2007 at 4:01 am

This is great technology, Toronto has been using it for over many years now just to scan parking lots for stolen vehicles, I’m glad to see the technology improrving and getting out on the road.

#6 Wake up, facial recognition is already being used and is getting better every year. Many of the casinos and airports around the world had it in service. Not only that but several years ago I saw a demonstration about person tracking capabilities of computers and the accuracy was amazing.

# 20 Darthvcdr said, on August 1st, 2007 at 4:18 am

#8
That struck me as well. Here we have a traffic cop, and he’s not following the most basic of traffic laws.. Video even showed him traveling at 100 Km/h at one point!
Such shining examples they set for us

I think it’s a great tool for aw enforcement. It’s not like it’s going to tell them anything they don’t already have the means to find out…

# 21 copsRcrooks said, on August 1st, 2007 at 4:24 am

like it’s too hard to make a theft proof car, an that validates drivers before starting…

# 22 Mister Mustard said, on August 1st, 2007 at 4:26 am

>>This is great technology, Toronto has been using it for
>>over many years

Well, I’ll be sure to put Toronto on the list of cities I won’t be going back to. They may have a nice Science Centre, but the Gestapo-like nature of t his “great technology” is just a little too creepy to swallow without gagging.

What do they find – teens fucking in the back seat? Ech. 1984 was 23 years ago, and we’re improving on it all the time. Aldous Huxley would be so proud.

Hail the OverLords. All hail.

# 23 George said, on August 1st, 2007 at 4:36 am

Notice NO SEATBELT. Above the law I guess.

# 24 John Scott said, on August 1st, 2007 at 4:41 am

People who complain about privacy with this must have something to hide! If you have not done anything wrong why are you worried?
Im personally am tired of all the people driving around without insurance and/or driver’s license. Your out in public with your car, how is violating your privacy? This is much better than being pulled over for a check. Now police know for sure that plate is involved in something wrong. This will help locate abducted children too.
The people that worry about this are the people that blow red lights,speed and comit crimes.

# 25 Mister Mustard said, on August 1st, 2007 at 4:47 am

>>People who complain about privacy with this must have
>>something to hide! If you have not done anything wrong why
>>are you worried?

Perhaps you should take that up with the authors of the Fourth Amendement to the Constitution:

“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. ”

Fucking commie pinko fags. “Bill of Rights”. What were they thinking????

# 26 Steve said, on August 1st, 2007 at 5:00 am

#25 It’s okay to point that out but remember it is in Canada and the last time I checked they were not covered by the Fourth Amendment.

The courts have ruled that you have no expectation of privacy while you are out in public either.

But I’m no lawyer……….

# 27 JohnnyL said, on August 1st, 2007 at 5:03 am

Hmmmmmmm. Interesting comments here. What I don’t see is any reasoned comments as to why the automating of the operation of running plates by the police is such a bad thing? The already do it manually. The real issue is if the plate is combined with location and the resulting information is stored in a database somewhere for future use…but seriously folks….no one gives a good god damn that you are on the road driving to Ben and Jerry’s or the local massage parlor. Your local law enforcement officials don;t have the resources or desire to bother with you.

# 28 Mister Mustard said, on August 1st, 2007 at 5:29 am

>>no one gives a good god damn that you are on the road
>>driving to Ben and Jerry’s or the local massage parlor.

Well. Since you’re so nonchalant about the whole thing, YOU can have the webcams in your bedroom and bathroom, and wiretapping of your phones.

I, for one, don’t care to have Big Brother tracking my every move (or “thrust”, in the case of the bedroom), whether I’m doing anything illegal or not.

As to the lack of a Bill of Rights in Canada….just one more reason why they’re lucky they’re under our protective wing.

# 29 Jägermeister said, on August 1st, 2007 at 5:34 am

#19 – Wake up, facial recognition is already being used and is getting better every year.

And I’m sure it’s capable of doing 3,000 scans per hour from a moving police car.

# 30 Fogetaboutit said, on August 1st, 2007 at 5:51 am

Next logical step…fire half the force, hire meter-maids at half the price, and collect revenue to your hearts content!

I wish the taxpayers would pay for my collections on overdue accounts.

I have no problem with using this technology in LAW ENFORCEMENT. However, collection of taxes, and revenues from unregulated industry seems a waste of resouces, and because it makes money for the cities you will see more and more of it. (Economics 101)

# 31 Mr. Fusion said, on August 1st, 2007 at 5:55 am

#27, Johnny,

What I don’t see is any reasoned comments as to why the automating of the operation of running plates by the police is such a bad thing?

That is part of the problem. You can’t see that everyone of us becomes a suspect for the amount of time it takes to run our plate. For that time we lose our privacy. And we never know about it.

Would you care to share all your credit card receipts? Just to make sure you aren’t doing anything wrong. How about hi definition cameras throughout your home, car, work place, your relatives, etc. Again, just to make sure you are not breaking any laws. Honest injun, I won’t keep a data base or tell too many people, or share it with other agencies (unless they ask).

On the surface this does seem to be intrusive. Yet if you think about it, you will only object if you have something to hide. Something criminal that is.

# 32 Mr. Fusion said, on August 1st, 2007 at 6:22 am

Mister Mustard.

Canada has the equivalent to the American Bill of Right contained in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In most ways it is a better document as it is written in more contemporary language with modern meanings. Also to satisfy the equivalent of the American Constitutional Constructionist, it also contains the caveat that these rights are as may be demonstrated in a “free and democratic society”. Generally, Canadian Judges have ruled more broadly and favorably under the Charter compared to American Judges who generally rule more narrowly.

The one area that differs greatly from the American Bill of Rights is the opt out feature. Here, a government may opt out of following a Rights ruling for up to five years. Although this could open the door to abuses, the government must still face the electorate to justify their action.

For a better read, Wikipedia has a decent article.
http://tinyurl.com/qrzvr

# 33 johnnyL said, on August 1st, 2007 at 6:27 am

#28 , #31
Your lack of reading comprehension and ability to jump to conclusions amazes me. Running license plates is already a legitimate policing process. Your arguments seem to imply that the police should be prevented from ever running a license plate unless they actually have a reasonable cause to run that particular plate.

While seeing no harm in making the process faster, I never once mentioned putting cameras anywhere else but you two seem to think that saying OK to one thing automatically implies acceptance of the inevitable slide to the other. Not a valid argument at all.

# 34 Bob said, on August 1st, 2007 at 6:30 am

My problem is the same as most of these “automated” ticketing mechanisms. It always ends up being a revenue raising scheme for the police and local country. The localities love it, since its more money, an automated cash register if you will, and once the locality starts making money on a crime they have to reason to discourage that crime, in fact many localities have been busted for doing the opposite (red light cameras with shortened yellow lights, being the most obvious)

# 35 Larry Cooper said, on August 1st, 2007 at 6:30 am

Question : IS or Would the FOXPLATE be illegal In the USA ???

# 36 johnnyL said, on August 1st, 2007 at 6:35 am

#31
“On the surface this does seem to be intrusive. Yet if you think about it, you will only object if you have something to hide. Something criminal that is.”

Funny stuff. This isn’t even a valid argument. I have no objection to the police running my plate as this is a legitimate police process when I am out driving. Hell, they can run my plate all they want. It has nothing to do with whether I have something to hide or not. However, this doesn’t imply acceptance of other non-constitutional monitoring. How you can jump from one to the other really amazes me. Lots of kneejerks in here.

# 37 Smith said, on August 1st, 2007 at 7:04 am

#27 “Your local law enforcement officials don;t have the resources or desire to bother with you.”

Ah, but you fail to understand: Technology will soon give law enforcement nearly infinite resources. There will be no facet of your life that will be beyond their view.

Yes, nearly all of that information is already available if they want to expend the time and resources to collect and collate the data. That hurdle provides protection to all of us from frivolous harassment. But it won’t be much longer when any officer can retrieve that data within seconds on a whim. Where is our protection then??

# 38 Mister Mustard said, on August 1st, 2007 at 7:18 am

>>Yet if you think about it, you will only object if you have
>>something to hide.

Or if you’re one of those left-leaning commie pinko fags that still put some faith in the Constitution.

# 39 Mr. Fusion said, on August 1st, 2007 at 7:34 am

#33, johnny,

Running license plates is already a legitimate policing process. Your arguments seem to imply that the police should be prevented from ever running a license plate unless they actually have a reasonable cause to run that particular plate.

Correct. The police should only intrude upon our privacy when there is a reasonable cause.

If this is reasonable, then why can’t the police stop pedestrians and request they identify themselves. Or have everyone submit to fingerprints. Whatever reason you may think of for why this would be an abuse, then apply the same reason to the license plate reader. If you don’t see any problem then you are past hope.

# 40 Mister Mustard said, on August 1st, 2007 at 8:07 am

>>unless they actually have a reasonable cause

Holy fuck! Probable cause?!?!?! Only a communist/ marxist/ stalinist/ leninist/ chavezist/ Fidel-loving fucker of women with Cuban cigars would ever give any credence to the Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights!!

Sheeit! Every red-blooded American real live nephew of his Uncle Sam knows that cops should be able to stop you on the street and give you a cavity search if they don’t like the t-shirt you’re wearing or your fancy Italian shoes!

# 41 Mr. Fusion said, on August 1st, 2007 at 8:18 am

#40, Mister Mustard

In your first paragraph, you missed :

“AIDs infected liberal”

Otherwise, right on.

# 42 chuck said, on August 1st, 2007 at 8:42 am

I like how they managed to squeeze in a still frame from 9-11 into the end of the video. “Reading license plates prevents terrorism”.

Someone explain to me how reading a license plate prevents a bunch of nut-jobs from flying a plane into a building?

Maybe they could use it in Baghdad to prevent car-bombings. They’d just need to get all the car-bombers to pre-register their cars before hand.

# 43 Arrius said, on August 1st, 2007 at 1:24 pm

In defense of the cop not wearing his seat belt, he was fat and he is a grown man so he should be allowed to not wear it.. Oh wait, neither of those is a valid legal basis.

# 44 Mister Mustard said, on August 1st, 2007 at 10:15 pm

>>In your first paragraph, you missed :
>>“AIDs infected liberal”

I thought about adding that, Mr. F., but given the sexual proclivities of the neocon right, wing it seems as likely (if not more likely) that one of THEM would be AIDS-infected. So I dropped it from the list.

Hallelujah! Bring me another pipefull of that fine crystal meth, and a little hillbilly heroin on the side!

# 45 Dave Mullenix said, on August 2nd, 2007 at 1:24 am

If you buy a new or used car, you’d better park it until the info gets to the DMV and out to the squads. I got pulled over on the way to work two days after I bought a car (from a dealer). The cop was driving around with one hand and entering every license plate he saw with the other and the DMV didn’t tell him about the license plate transfer yet. So I was late to work. Didn’t bother the cop any.

# 46 John said, on August 8th, 2007 at 3:14 pm

This is great and all, but… How about spending more money or our terrible roads instead of useless gadgets. Or getting police to actually protect drivers. Things such as pulling over people for riding the left lane! Or 30mph drivers on the highway, or people driving with their high beams on all the time, people who don’t use turn signals, or can’t stay in lane or how about just getting them to stop turning on their lights blowing a red light then turning their lights back off. If it isn’t an emergency they need to follow traffic laws like everyone else. While we are at it, these speed limits are laughable, they are at least 20 years old, car dynamics have improved how much since then? It is the slow, mundane, everyday drivers that cause accidents and should have their licenses taken away, if you are going to drive be efficient for gods sake or don’t bother with it. I’m talking to you SUV drivers.

Leave Your Reply Below...

Comment Moderation is Active, so if your comment doesn't
show up immediately, please don't submit it again.

Special Deals 4U

25% off eHarmony subscription with code EHTECH
12-percent discount forever with code TECH
10-percent discount and free month using TECH10
10-percent or 30 dollars off weekly car rental!
Get 10-percent discount on car rental!
Get 10% off rental cars!
Get 10% off Dollar rentals!
Discounts on domain names!