Private companies in the US are hoping to use red light cameras and speed cameras as the basis for a nationwide surveillance network similar to one that will be active next year in the UK. Redflex and American Traffic Solutions (ATS), the top two photo enforcement providers in the US, are quietly shopping new motorist tracking options to prospective state and local government clients.

The technology would be integrated with the Australian company’s existing red light camera and speed camera systems. It allows officials to keep full video records of passing motorists and their passengers, limited only by available hard drive space and the types of cameras installed. To gain public acceptance, the surveillance program is being initially sold as an aid for police looking to solve Amber Alert cases and locate stolen cars.

Oh here we go again.  We must think of the children.  They are flat out telling you that they are going to lie and say that “initially” it will be used to find little lost children and stolen cars.  The public will eat this up and you will be screwed because, if you say you’re against these sorts of things, then you hate children and you must be some sort of sick pedophile who supports murderers and thieves.

ATS likewise is promoting motorist tracking technologies. In a recent proposal to operate 200 speed cameras for the Arizona state police, the company explained that its ticketing cameras could be integrated into a national vehicle tracking database. This would allow a police officer to simply enter a license plate number into a laptop computer and receive an email as soon as a speed camera anywhere in the state recognized that plate.

What a beautiful device.  Now we can track anyone we want, guilty or not.

Such programs would be fully consistent with existing law on searches and seizures. In the 2003 case Washington v. William Bradley Jackson, the Washington State Supreme Court ruled that police could not use a physical GPS tracking device to monitor a suspect’s movements without first obtaining a warrant. No warrant would be needed or restrictions applied to license plate tracking systems which do not require any physical contact. Instead, individual police officers could monitor the movements of suspected criminals or even their wives and neighbors at any time.

There you go.  No Warrant.  Track your spouses.  Hate your neighbor?  Track them too.

Records on all vehicle movements taken from a nationwide network of cameras will be stored for five years in a central government Automated Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) server, allowing police to keep tabs on criminals and political opponents.

This is in the United Kingdom.  Imagine how easy it is to get that politician in your back pocket once you’ve followed him around town for weeks.

Remember, the cameras that were put in place for the Republican convention in NYC in 2004 are still there, with Mayor Bloomberg advocating the use of more cameras.  The cameras from the Republican Convention in St. Paul, Minnesota are, conveniently, still there.  I suspect the ones from the Democratic conventions are still there too.

Please, tell me again why we need at least four CCTV cameras at every intersection?  Is it really to prevent crime?