Question of the Day: Dump Plate Readers or Double Down and Make ’em Better?
The complaints centered on automated license plate readers are long and well known. From incorrect results to improper usage, all those came to a head recently when an automotive journalist was driving a Land Rover press vehicle when he was pulled over and surrounded by police officers.
Those officers ordered him out of the vehicle with hands resting on their hips before realizing the plate reader he passed mistakenly identified the vehicle as stolen. As reported by our own Matt Posky today, opponents of the readers, primarily those produced by Flock Safety, are bringing their complaints to the public in a big way, creating a “National Week of Action” during the week of Aug. 16.
The idea is to give opponents of the AI-assisted surveillance machines a voice to complain and push for either the end of the technology or, at least, stronger restrictions on their use. They’re hoping for protests similar to the No Kings efforts in recent months: a grass root push for change.
Those who support the technology remain resolute in their use, including Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley who argued that those who were against the use of the devices were criminals. Others want to expand the use of the technology to help law enforcement agencies in other ways.
So, today’s QOTD: Dump the readers or improve them to avoid the numerous problematic and dramatic issues they’ve created. Let us know.
[Images: Flock Safety]
Become a TTAC insider. Get the latest news, features, TTAC takes, and everything else that gets to the truth about cars first by subscribing to our newsletter.
Michael Strong has spent more than 25 years writing about the automotive industry. A Detroit-area native, he’s written about everything from local car shows to product reviews to financial news. Currently he writes and edits for a variety of national and local publications. He’s also a longtime member of the Automotive Press Association and the International Motor Press Association, and a graduate of Georgia Southern University. Hail Southern! Despite a love for ’70s land yachts and BMWs from the late ’80s and early ’90s, his personal vehicle is neither of those.
More by Michael Strong
Comments
Join the conversation
You cannot stop the technology -- it is too useful. Our small town local police find stolen cars every week - and we benefit from them doing so. It needs to be made better. Perhaps police need to have a better protocol of how to respond to a car that has been "tagged" by a Flock camera as "stolen." There are converging technologies, like the ability to disable a car remotely - no need to use four Ford Exploders to "box in" a vehicle that can't move, and turn the stop into a potential scene. The police could simply call the vehicle operator on the car's cell phone (they all have them built-in) and ask him/her what's up.
Indeed, in the future, all of our vehicles will have some version of a digital ID all the time (in place of license plates). A sort of Air Tag for everybody all the time. Then there will be far fewer police stops to check tags, stickers, etc., and in reality the police-to-suspect interactions will be a lot fewer - and thus systemically safer.
The problem is mostly at street level. Police need to use more discretion about what happens at a traffic stop. More positive ID at a traffic stop including showing to the driver photos of the vehicle and plate from back when and where the Flock took the picture. Not just a paper full of plate numbers with the driver's plate circled. More releasing of drivers "on personal recognizance" especially away from home.