Is There a Such Thing as Privacy?

August 27, 2013 at 1:02 pm Leave a comment

By Andrew Richter

Throughout my life I’ve had little regard for the ACLU and I’ve tried to support law enforcement whenever I can. It’s the politicians who make the all the stupid laws that I usually take issue with, not individual member of law enforcement. This story makes me wonder if we haven’t gone a little too far;

To law enforcement, automatic license plate readers are an effective tool for nabbing suspects, returning stolen cars and investigating murders. Assisted by license plate reader technology, police can drive through parking lots, automatically checking license plates as they go. Readers can be placed in squads or fixed in place. 

Don;t they have anything better to do then randomly ride through parking lots?

Others view the technology, capable of capturing thousands of license plates per minute, as a potential electronic stalker. “There are no restrictions whatsoever,” American Civil Liberties Union Minnesota attorney Teresa Nelson said of law enforcement in Minnesota amassing license plate data. “That really concerns us.”

Automatic license plate readers match license plate numbers against downloaded police “hot lists,” checking for stolen vehicles, missing persons, outstanding warrants and other items. The State Patrol uses a Minnesota Department of Public Safety’s Driver and Vehicle Services Division, National Crime Information Center and Bureau of Criminal Apprehension “hot list” database, according to documents obtained by the ACLU.

Intimate activities of the innocent, as well as criminals, can be tracked, critics warn. The use of automatic license plate readers isn’t limited to big cities. They’re in the suburbs, too.

If people are innocent, why do they have any right to track activities?

The Washington County Sheriff’s Department uses two readers; the Bloomington Police Department has five squads equipped. Other suburban police departments, including the Inver Grove Heights and South St. Paul police departments in Dakota County, use license plate readers, as well. The Minnesota State Patrol also has a squad equipped with a reader.

Minnesota Sheriffs Association Executive Director Jim Franklin said, of law enforcement entities in the state, probably fewer than 20 departments are using the technology. But Minnesota Department of Public Safety Commissioner Ramona Dohman suggested that could grow.

“I would say there are probably some agencies holding off, waiting to purchase the technology until they have a better understanding what they actually can do with it,” Dohman said. The number of license plates being read is huge.

According to Minnesota State Patrol records obtained by the ACLU, between January and November 2011, the patrol registered 752,293 plate reads. About 329 citations and 63 arrests were made.

So let me get this straight; Out of 752,293 there have been 329 citations and 63 arrests? That;s a .04% citation rate (and it was probably parking tickets) and a .008% arrest rate. Does that seem worth losing your freedom?

Some law enforcement officials, including Dohman, argue license plate readers are effective.

Of course, more power to you!

The Bloomington Police Department used its readers to check vehicles in a neighborhood following a murder, said Bloomington Police Department Deputy Chief Vic Poyer, who said he thinks readers are effective as law enforcement tools.

Dakota County Attorney James Backstrom gave a spirited defense of the use of license plate readers.

“It is not an infringement of privacy,” Backstrom said, saying anyone can take pictures of license plates in public. Police for years have been jotting down plate numbers and entering them into computers, he said.

“You’ve got nothing to worry about unless you’re breaking the law,” Backstrom said.


Lawmakers have been grappling with privacy issues relating to automatic license plate readers. How long law enforcement should retain license plate data and whether the information should be public or private are key concerns. 

As the result of a request to state officials by the city of Minneapolis, license plate numbers along with date, time and location data on vehicles, plus pictures of license plates, vehicles and areas surrounding the vehicles, as captured by readers, have been classified as private data.

The temporary classification expires Aug. 1, 2015, or until legislative action.

Beyond whether reader data should be public or private is the question of how long it should be kept.

Critics, such as the ACLU, assert the numbers of criminals arrested through the use of license plate readers pales in comparison to the massive amount of data being collected.

Retention policies among departments vary. The State Patrol, in most cases, deletes license plate data within 48 hours. Bloomington keeps data for 90 days.

“I think 90 days is a good balance,” Poyer said.

The Democratic-led House last session passed legislation that does not permit retention of license plate data by law enforcement not linked to criminal activity. But the Democratic-led Senate did not act on license plate reader legislation.

House Civil Law Committee Chairman John Lesch, DFL-St. Paul, a prosecutor for the city of St. Paul, said law enforcement officials themselves are uncomfortable with amassing data on innocent people.

“This is really stepping outside the umbrella of constitutional understanding,” Lesch said.

Keeping license plate reader data for lengthy periods can prove useful in solving crimes, Lesch said. So would planting microchips in everyone, he added, sarcastically. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Ron Latz, DFL-St. Louis Park, expects data retention will be debated in the Senate next session.

Yeah the DFL on DFL debate!

“I don’t think there’s any magic number,” Latz said of length of data retention. Latz feels comfortable with a 90-day threshold, he said.Dohman, for one, indicated flexibility.

“We would support anything more than zero retention,” she said. Officials need to move cautiously, Latz said, when weighing civil liberties against the needs of law enforcement.

“It’s hard to roll things back,” he said. Don Gemberling, a data privacy expert with the Minnesota Coalition on Government Information, views license plate readers as a piece of a larger puzzle.

“The more sophisticated surveillance technology becomes, the more questions we have,” he said. Gemberling doesn’t believe automatic license plate readers are the same as cops walking their beat. It’s automatic, after all, and there’s no judgement involved, he said.

Backstrom, asked whether collecting large amounts of license plate data to catch criminals was an acceptable trade-off, said to talk to crime victims.

“They’ll tell you it is,” he said.

Trade Liberty for security and you lose both!



Entry filed under: City Government, Crystal, Safety.

Another Joke of a Light Rail Meeting Paully Wally of the DFL Sun Post Complains an Alcohol Tax Didn’t Pass

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed

Twitter Updates


%d bloggers like this: