By Joseph Rittenhouse —
Sedona, AZ –In a recent survey by the Red Rock News, almost 70 percent of the respondents voted against the intrusive use of license plate reading cameras in Sedona.
There were two editorials written in Sedona.biz—one for and one against—the installation of these cameras that can not only read the plates but also identify the identity and address of the driver, as well as determine if the vehicle is stolen, if there is a warrant out on the driver, if it is properly registered and insured, and even how many scratches or dents the vehicle has.
The database links to other similar systems across the country, and the information is shared locally and non-locally.
One particularly egregious editorial was written by Bear Howard defending the placement of these cameras in the community.
Another by Sedona.biz editor Tommy Acosta decried the imposition of a 1984-style surveillance system in Sedona.
From Bear’s previous writings, it appeared he was a level-headed and well-informed Sedona resident, but his defense of the surveillance system calls his veracity and perhaps sanity into question.
Can’t he see that this acceptance of the additional surveillance will lead to mission creep, and before we know it there will be surveillance cameras at every intersection and side street in Sedona?
That’s how the sheep are sheared and made accustomed to being herded and gated so the authorities can exert even tighter control over our fine citizens and minority communities in Sedona.
Frankly, I am insulted by the city council, and if I were the RRN or Sedona.biz, I would interview every council member and ask how they feel about it.
All I know is if you asked me, and I knew which council member felt this or that way about the intrusion, I would not vote for any who supported the license plate readers.
They should immediately tear down the ones that are already up and trash the remaining eight waiting to be installed.
Kudos to Fox and Acosta for going against the intrusion. Hopefully, the council will note the 70 percent unfavorability of the RRN survey and heed the will of the public.
This is an advertisement
3 Comments
Joseph
great editorial full of valid points. My only issue with all of this is that the system is not abusive nor is its alleged declared intent. People abuse these systems they do not abuse themselves. Given the very frequent occurrences of mass shootings, foreign and domestic extremist terror attacks, gun running and human traffickers many of which flow through Sedona, we need systems like this to help combat those types of very REAL violent crimes mostly perpetrated by US and State Citizenry (Primarily White Nationalist and White Supremacists according to FBI and DOJ statistics). Perhaps the solution is more and better oversight as well as public access and transparency as safeguards against abuse? Still could happen just like there are good cops as well as very bad ones. But we do need law, laws and enforcement of them other are left with anarchy and kaos. I’m writing this with my counter terror hat on. I worked many years studying and combating Domestic/National/Transnational/International terror groups and individuals with an onus upon Domestic Hate and Terror Organizations. Tools are tools until and unless abused.
A line has been crossed. Police already have license plate readers in their cars. They’re searching for certain vehicles while they’re on patrol. They are not monitoring citizen movement from a fixed location.
This isn’t 1984…yet. what’s next, facial recognition? Yes, it’s already runing in China by the CCP.
In a demonstration of China’s extensive surveillance network and facial recognition technology, BBC reporter John Sudworth was located and apprehended by authorities in just seven minutes. This exercise was designed to showcase the effectiveness of the government’s surveillance capabilities.
There was a video report done on this capability. The police in the field were not aware this was a test. An alert was put out to law enforcement to detain the reporter. 7 min later in a major city….caught.
When politicians start thinking they’re above the law, and start acting like they run little fifedoms, what better way to control population than to spy on them. Plus keeping that data on file.
In China, because of pollution, on certain days only certain cars with plates ending in a specific number are allowed to be on the road. Wonder how many other reasons can be dreamed up to control your movements.
In the name of safety you are willing to give up liberty and freedom of movement? Are you frigging kidding?
It’s COVID time. You’re not supposed to be out. Really? In Tim Waltz’s Minnesota neighbors were encouraged to rat on their fellow citizens if they went out.
They say that this “data” is wiped every month, by a private company not subject to a FOIA request.
This is not a slippy slope, this is a greased runway to a cataclysm of abuse of power by hungry demigods.
Government is already way to big, abusive and controlling. They poke and monitor what you do already. They have access to your every move through your cellphone. Now they want to track and record your movements in your car?
This is past creepy. We either operate as a free society, or we submit to big brother.
For those who like big brother…there are many countries you can move to. Be protected, be safe, and be controlled.
Not here.
Is the license data accessible ONLY to law enforcement officials? Is its sale PROHIBITED to all others? If the answer to both questions is YES, then the case for objecting to the cameras seems weak. If NO, privacy issues are far more relevant and compelling.
One particularly galling argument I’ve encountered is that Sedona doesn’t have much car theft. Where’s the logic in that? First, if your car is the only one stolen in this jurisdiction, you would want law enforcement to every tool available to locate and recover it. Second, if a bad guy starts a crime spree in our area (sound familiar?), every resident should want law enforcement to have all the tools available to hunt down and capture the culprit.
Overall, Americans seem to over-react to government surveillance and under-react to the exploitation of personal data for commercial uses. Personally, I feel annoyed and sometimes threatened by pop-up ads that are algorithmically-driven based on my internet searches, credit card transactions, internet purchases and news items read.
In short, there seems to be a world of difference between surveillance for safety and surveillance for profit. Good policy should recognize, adopt and enforce that difference.