You *are* being watched...
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: Ret. on 23 Mar 2010 06:58 nonanon wrote: > On Mon, 22 Mar 2010 21:50:31 +0000, Ret. wrote: > >> From the current issue of the Cheshire Police monthly newspaper in an >> article describing the creation of the NWMPG (North West Motorway >> Police Group) which is a joint venture between Cheshire Police, >> Merseyside Police, Lancashire Police and, shortly, Greater >> Manchester Police: >> >> Using Number Plate Technology; > > Uh, you do know this has been happening for many years? Thus the law > change to require certain fonts on licence plates? > > Heathrow and City of London have been doing this for yonks. Yes of course - but static sites are a comparatively recent introduction. Kev
From: Ret. on 23 Mar 2010 07:01 smurf wrote: > Ret. wrote: >> From the current issue of the Cheshire Police monthly newspaper in an >> article describing the creation of the NWMPG (North West Motorway >> Police Group) which is a joint venture between Cheshire Police, >> Merseyside Police, Lancashire Police and, shortly, Greater Manchester >> Police: >> Using Number Plate Technology; >> >> "In addition to the Mobile Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) >> cameras inside police vehicles, it was always envisaged that the >> motorways would use 'fixed site' cameras to target criminals >> travelling into the region. Having ANPR at fixed sites would also >> help police anti-terrorism, >> investigation and intelligence analysis. > > The thing about ANPR, if used proportionally and with very strict > auditing of usage, it could be an extremely valuable tool to keep > uninsured cars off the road, something that is in everyones interest, > the downside however the colossal erosion of freedom that it > represents. Its not the squad car driving round the estates with anpr > built into the vehicle thats the problem, but the network of cameras > that can (and will be) used to track and carry out surveillance. Rule > one, if the information is gathered, it will be used., rule 2 the > width of uses will far out grow that which is currently percieved. As I have mentioned in another post - the vast number of 'reads' per day means that it would be impossible to record the movements of 'all' vehicles - and why would they want to waste time and resources in doing so? The only vehicles that are tracked are those recorded as 'hits' - ie, those vehicles that are 'tagged' as being of police interest. Kev
From: Adrian on 23 Mar 2010 07:11 Bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> 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. With ease. > Don't you think that the information collated, could be used in a > positive way? > > You always look at the negative side of these things. There's a positive side to the government doing widespread tracking of the movement of citizens with no reasonable grounds or suspicions? What?
From: Phil Stovell on 23 Mar 2010 07:36 On Tue, 23 Mar 2010 11:01:47 +0000, Ret. wrote: > As I have mentioned in another post - the vast number of 'reads' per day > means that it would be impossible to record the movements of 'all' > vehicles - and why would they want to waste time and resources in doing > so? The only vehicles that are tracked are those recorded as 'hits' - > ie, those vehicles that are 'tagged' as being of police interest. I could quite easily write a program that traced, as far as possible, every car number that appeared on every camera. Get me the data, and I'll do it! Sort all the data sets into ascending registration number and date/time of photographing and location - I expect you can see what I mean. > Kev
From: Ret. on 23 Mar 2010 07:41
Adrian wrote: > Bod <bodron57(a)tiscali.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they > were saying: > >>>> 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. With ease. > >> Don't you think that the information collated, could be used in a >> positive way? >> >> You always look at the negative side of these things. > > There's a positive side to the government doing widespread tracking of > the movement of citizens with no reasonable grounds or suspicions? They are not tracking the movements of citizens who they have no interest in. Kev |