-
If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Why you should never EVER EVER buy an EoTech.
- Thread starter dcmdon
- Start date
meh, can't say I agree
they're certainly not the only company that makes license plate reading equipment
and in this global economy it seems that most conglomerates have a reason to be hated and it's hard to find a good holographic sight made by a local mom and pop operation
they're certainly not the only company that makes license plate reading equipment
and in this global economy it seems that most conglomerates have a reason to be hated and it's hard to find a good holographic sight made by a local mom and pop operation
I don't agree either.
Giving officer's the ability to efficiently find stolen cars and people with warrants based on their publicly displayed license plate isn't a violation of any right.
It's not like they're selling technology that allows police to see what you're doing in your car/home, etc.
Giving officer's the ability to efficiently find stolen cars and people with warrants based on their publicly displayed license plate isn't a violation of any right.
It's not like they're selling technology that allows police to see what you're doing in your car/home, etc.
I don't believe in opposing technology, I only agree with opposing government use of technology. If you don't think police officers should track license plates, then there should be a law or something of that nature to prevent them from using license plate trackers.
Right, otherwise we would need to complain about the companies that sell them cars, tanks, rifles, handguns, pepper spray, etc.
there was that whole Pearl Harbor incident
This is where it crosses the line to me.
Running a plate is totally different than tracking plates and creating a database of who travels where and when. They should address people who are wanted for warrants or stealing cars, but not keep tabs on anyone else.
If the technology logs every plate it scans and location, than i take issue with it. If it doesn't log data and only brings wanted individuals to the officer's attention, i don't see it as a constitutional issue.
Yeah, that's complete bullshit.
dcmdon
NES Member
That might make sense for something like a gun, but ALPR technology is DESIGNED to infringe your rights. There is no misuse. Did you even watch the video. The company touts how the LEO can drive through a parking lot and scan every car he drives by.
dcmdon
NES Member
No. It logs every plate along with the time, date and location. Many PDs refuse to share their record retention policies. I have FOIA'd two PDs on their record retention policys re ALPRs and have been stonewalled both times.
I have FOIA'd one PD for all "hits" on my car, including location, time and date, and have been flatly refused.
Don
dcmdon
NES Member
That was 75 years ago. Get over it. Japan has been a solid ally for 65 years.
yeah, I get it. I'm just not all that impressed with the technology. Broken down it's pretty a pretty basic GPS database. L3 has the edge because they're a big player in LE/MIL networks.
in sum, don't blame the tool or the maker--it's the person using it that you have to worry about
dcmdon
NES Member
The technological bits are not impressive at all. Like you said, GPS, cameras, some recognition software, and a database.
But taken together, its Orwellian. Especially if towns and states send all their hit info to a central DB where it can all be sorted and analyzed. In this country of automobiles, they can literally track every citizen without any kind of judicial oversight.
+1
Tools in the wrong hands are capable of a lot of damage but it is not a reason to condemn the maker.
Same as with guns. Cops can use it to shoot bad guys or innocents.
I do however admire the gun companies that refuse to sell to law enforcement in states where the citizens are not afforded the same rights.
Security cameras will exist and continue to advance. It is the bs like cops using it to identify cars at gun shows or to identify ccw holders in order to pull them over.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
FIFY. The American taxpayer has been forced to subsidize Japan's national defense for all that time
They do for firearms instructors.
Mike
Sent from my cell phone with a tiny keyboard and large thumbs...
dcmdon
NES Member
We were forced to subsidize them because we insisted on a constitution that left them effectively defenseless after WWII. (thats what UNCONDITIONAL surrender means) Its understandable considering teh times.
Getting off topic but my point is: why should we subsidize it in perpetuity? They have the ability to change their constitution if need be, and they're allowed to have defensive forces.
