D&D and the rising pandemic

[Deset Gled]

The technological barriers might only be minor, but, the legal barriers are a LOT stronger than I think you appreciate. Number one, most of those roads are not federal. They are state, or even county (provincial or county in Canada), meaning that the federal government has zero rights to monitor traffic cameras (for example) to track individuals. While I'm sure that traffic camera data is used for some purposes, I really, really doubt it would survive any challenge if you were actually tracking individuals. Remember, you cannot even require travel papers within the country. Police have zero right to ask you for identification without probably cause. Police, while they might be able to randomly check your license plate, would have a serious issue if they were surveilling you without a warrant or probable cause for any length of time.

I think the legal barriers are a lot grayer than you think.

New Jersey stores your plate information for 5 years every time you drive by one of their cameras, and they are one of the few states with a law that says they have to eventually delete it. Many states use data "pooled into regional sharing systems".

On the other side of the country, here's a video of officers in Denver literally pulling up personal info on every car that drives past an intentionally placed cruiser.

True, people like the ACLU are fighting this. But right now, there's nothing stopping police from simply putting a number of cars in strategic locations, taking the plate from every car that drives past, and giving that info to the feds. And this is without even bringing up the automatic tolling system.

The chance for abuse of this information is massive. The security you'd need around this information is incredible and you'd have to trust that, for effectively perpetuity, people in government positions would be free of any sort of improperiety. There are all sorts of business and governmental agencies that would pay all the monies for access to this information.

No disagreement with you on that point. It's a little scary.

Also, it's common for businesses to use the same tools and information.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

OTOH, @Deset Gled, Texas barely uses most of their traffic cameras because they violate the state constitution in numerous ways, so they’re mostly there for real-time traffic data. No more tickets via camera.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

But as a "penumbral law" (looked that one up ), isn't that pretty limited in scope? My understanding is that right to privacy is only a thing in very limited circumstances. You have privacy in your home (covered by search and seizure laws, etc) and you have privacy with your personal information (HIPPA). But you have no real right to privacy when you are in public.

Obviously I'm glossing over a lot of the details (both broad and minutiae, and especially with regards to civil law, which isn't directly applicable here). But at the end of the day, anyone can be filmed in public without giving consent, and the police can do things like scan license plates or track when you leave and enter your home without a warrant; they just can't search you or follow you inside without one. That's the same sort of information that could be collected by the government to help track COVID. There's plenty of allowance to watch movement of people between buildings in a town, along roads between cities, or any other form of regional transit.

Also, just to be clear, I'm not arguing this is morally right or wouldn't get eventually tossed out. I'm just saying that I think the laws are gray/loose enough to allow something like this to happen on a temporary basis.

I’m a contracts lawyer, mainly, but even I can see the big problem with tracking has to do with freedom of assembly rights and the intersecting right to privacy. If the government can figure out where you are, they know who you are with. If they know THAT, they can curtail your right to free assembly “for reasons”.

The thing is there’s all kinds of case law that limits the ability of the government to collect that kind of data on precisely those issues. All kinds of organizations and private individuals have successfully fought to keep their list of known associates private, unless and until the government can show a legitimate reason for doing so AND obtaining a warrant for gathering such info. Some of those laws DO have exigent circumstances exceptions, but not all, and those that do are narrowly construed against the government.

A government tracking system would need t be “always on” to be of any real use. To satisfy current law, such data would have to be stored in an “inaccessible black box“ unless and until a warrant was obtained.

Even if that passed a sniff test and made it into law, the first instant that black box was breached, it’s likely the law would be challenged and invalidated. How would the government prove that it could prevent future breaches? (It can’t.)

So, in order to have a legal and effective tracking tool like this, you’d need a very carefully drafted Amendment negating the need for warrants to access the data.

And honestly, I don’t see that happening.

 

[Zardnaar]

I’m a contracts lawyer, mainly, but even I can see the big problem with tracking has to do with freedom of assembly rights and the intersecting right to privacy. If the government can figure out where you are, they know who you are with. If they know THAT, they can curtail your right to free assembly “for reasons”.

The thing is there’s all kinds of case law that limits the ability of the government to collect that kind of data on precisely those issues. All kinds of organizations and private individuals have successfully fought to keep their list of known associates private, unless and until the government can show a legitimate reason for doing so AND obtaining a warrant for gathering such info. Some of those laws DO have exigent circumstances exceptions, but not all, and those that do are narrowly construed against the government.

A government tracking system would need t be “always on” to be of any real use. To satisfy current law, such data would have to be stored in an “inaccessible black box“ unless and until a warrant was obtained.

Even if that passed a sniff test and made it into law, the first instant that black box was breached, it’s likely the law would be challenged and invalidated. How would the government prove that it could prevent future breaches? (It can’t.)

So, in order to have a legal and effective tracking tool like this, you’d need a very carefully drafted Amendment negating the need for warrants to access the data.

And honestly, I don’t see that happening.

USA
Give me liberty or give me death.

NZ
Have fun with the death part.

13 colonies wanna rejoin the Commonwealth?

 

[Mallus]

USA
Give me liberty or give me death.

In reality...

USA
Give me liberty or give me death.
<faces actual death>
Help us, federal government, you’re our only hope!

 

[tomBitonti]

But as a "penumbral law" (looked that one up ), isn't that pretty limited in scope? My understanding is that right to privacy is only a thing in very limited circumstances. You have privacy in your home (covered by search and seizure laws, etc) and you have privacy with your personal information (HIPPA). But you have no real right to privacy when you are in public.

Obviously I'm glossing over a lot of the details (both broad and minutiae, and especially with regards to civil law, which isn't directly applicable here). But at the end of the day, anyone can be filmed in public without giving consent, and the police can do things like scan license plates or track when you leave and enter your home without a warrant; they just can't search you or follow you inside without one. That's the same sort of information that could be collected by the government to help track COVID. There's plenty of allowance to watch movement of people between buildings in a town, along roads between cities, or any other form of regional transit.

Also, just to be clear, I'm not arguing this is morally right or wouldn't get eventually tossed out. I'm just saying that I think the laws are gray/loose enough to allow something like this to happen on a temporary basis.

There are other limitations. For example, continuous, 24 hour surveillance is not allowed without a warrant. There is precedence on this in re police putting a tracker on a suspects car. (Although, this is a limited protection if most public locations perform surveillance.)

Be safe, be well,
Tom Bitonti

 

[Zardnaar]

In reality...

USA
Give me liberty or give me death.
<faces actual death>
Help us, federal government, you’re our only hope!

Yeah pretty much. We had some think tank here that qualified for assistance.

"We'll never take government money"

Poo hits the fan splattering the room.

Takes a handout.

 

[ccs]

In reality...

USA
Give me liberty or give me death.
<faces actual death>
Help us, federal government, you’re our only hope!

Well then we're all screwed.

 

[Mallus]

Well then we're all screwed.

I’m trying to be optimistic!

(my wife covers the pessimism)

 

[Zardnaar]

Well then we're all screwed.

Of things go well you might have a chance post January.