From: steve robinson on
Brimstone wrote:

> "steve robinson" <steve(a)> wrote in message
> news:xn0grznd2nha2s000(a)
> > ... and several navel officers
> So you had that one buttoned up? ;-)

Just about but the person concerned was convinced it was me
From: Ret. on
Rob wrote:
> Ret. wrote:
>>> Rob wrote:
>>>> Ret. wrote:
>>>>>> The point I am trying to make is that the lives of the vast
>>>>>> majority of the motoring public are totally innocuous and, as
>>>>>> such, the police have not the slightest interest into checking
>>>>>> where they are going.
>>>> And do you believe that this data will only EVER be available to
>>>> the Police?
>>> I do not even know if 'non-hit' readings are retained. Do you?
> Of course they are. Why would anyone delete data that was expensively
> collected, when it may be of use in the future - cf. email traffic,
> phone logs, isp logs etc..etc.

According to Wikipedia - anpr info is retained for five years.

From: Conor on
On 23/03/2010 11:40, Ret. wrote:

> According to the article, once all the current 'batch' of cameras are up
> and running, there will be around 560,000 'reads' per day.

Is that all?

Who do you
> think is going to be checking up on the movements of 560,000 individual
> vehicles every day? (And why would they want to?).


Say for example that you do a bit of gardening and own an allotment. You
do a regular journey once a week or a fortnight to an agricultural
supplier where you buy bits and bobs for the allotment. Your wife is a
hairdresser and as you have more time free, you make regular trips to
the hairdressing suppliers to buy various consumables and equipment for
the missus. At both locations, you happen to pay cash because its small
amounts and you always have enough money on you.

On the Monday, you went to the agricultural suppliers and then the
hairdressers. From there, you went to the allotment where you spent a
couple of hours before returning home.

On Wednesday, you go to the allotment to check the plants and then take
a drive into a city. On that Wednesday there's a terrorist attack on a
high value target in that city within a couple of hundred yards from
where you parked. Forensic examination reveals a fertiliser bomb was the
explosive device used.

Using ANPR data collated on a database, it could be ascertained that you
made regular trips to a place that sold fertiliser (agricultural
suppliers) and also a place that sold hydrogen peroxide (hairdressing
suppliers) and then went to the allotment where you had a shed that you
could construct a fertiliser bomb. On the morning, it could be claimed
that you went to collect the bomb, drove to the target area then planted
the device. You would have little to prove you didn't. You would have
trace chemicals on your clothes, in your house, in the car, in the
allotment shed. You paid cash so you can't prove that you didn't buy the
ingredients needed. Your journeys show a pattern that could be
interpreted as a bomber buying the components in small amounts so not to
arouse suspicion, storing them in an allotment shed whereupon you
assembled the device and transported it to its target.

Hey presto, the Police have their man. You have no defence even though
all you did was a bit of gardening and some errands for the wife...

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.
From: Conor on
On 23/03/2010 11:41, Ret. wrote:

> They are not tracking the movements of citizens who they have no
> interest in.

And just how do you think they, such as the intelligence services,
suddenly decide to have interest in individuals with no criminal record?

I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.
From: Ret. on
Conor wrote:
> On 23/03/2010 10:57, Ret. wrote:
>> Do you think they have the slightest interest in where *you* are
>> going? (Unless, that is, your vehicle is tagged as 'of police
>> interest). Look at the number of 'reads' per day. Do you think it
>> remotely possible
>> that that number could be recorded in any way to check on everyone's
>> movements?
> Yes. There is more than enough computing and network capacity to do
> that.

What I keep trying to point out is that although a vehicle plate may be read
and recorded - it is simply data in a database. Unless there is a need to
access that data (and in most cases there wont), then it will never be
anything other than data. There is not an officer who is responsible for
tracking *your* movements (or anyone else's other than people of specific
interest), for example.