Cleveland Plain Dealer Owner Demands Takedown Of Unflattering Video Featuring Candidate It Endorsed In Governor's Race

Vermont's Automatic License Plate Readers: 7.9 Million Plates Captured, Five Crimes Solved

from the the-finest-in-haystacking-technology dept

Thu, Oct 30th 2014 3:27pm — Tim Cushing

The sales pitch for automatic license plate readers is how great they are at helping cops solve crimes. From hunting down stolen cars to tracking pedophiles across jurisdictions, ALPRs supposedly make policing a breeze by gathering millions of time/date/location records every single day and making it all available to any law enforcement agency willing to buy the software and pay the licensing fees.

The systems come with civil liberties baggage -- privacy issues that aren't completely articulable, at least not in terms of what the courts have held to contain sufficient expectations of privacy. A single photo of a car on a public road isn't a privacy violation. But what about dozens or hundreds of photos that more resemble a passive tracking system than a set of public snapshots? That's a bit more of a gray area -- one that hasn't been fully explored by the courts at this point. Adjacent decisions notwithstanding, ALPRs are mildly intrusive and have troubling implications due to their capabilities, but at this point, they still operate within the confines of the Constitution.

So, if civil liberties are still intact, what's the next point of attack? Maybe it's the alleged efficiency. Are law enforcement agencies getting their money's worth?

It's a trick question. First and foremost, it's the public's money paying for these. In many cases, DHS grants have paid for ALPRs, with local agencies name-checking terrorism and extremism to increase the odds of obtaining funds. Even when paid for out-of-pocket, it's still the public footing the bill.

The systems aren't cheap. And from what VPR (NPR Vermont) has uncovered, they're not really worth the expense. (via Digital Fourth)

Over the past five years, law enforcement agencies in Vermont have invested more than $1 million in technology that gathers millions of data points every year about the whereabouts of vehicles across the state.

Yet even with the millions of scans, the system has not led to many arrests or breakthroughs in major criminal investigations, and it hasn’t led to an increase in the number of tickets written for the offenses the technology is capable of detecting.

No one sells a city council (or the general public) on the wonders of ALPRs by highlighting how many unregistered vehicles might be ticketed or pointing out other mundane traffic enforcement benefits they might provide. Probably just as well, considering these systems have had no discernible effect in these areas.

It's the "big ticket" crimes that sell ALPRs and push them past the complaints of those concerned about citizens' privacy and civil liberties. Kidnapping, auto theft, child pornographers, terrorism, etc. These are the sort of thing that put lead in legislators' collective pencils, stirring them to approve funding or sign off on grant requests, and so on. How do Vermont's ALPRs stack up against capital-C "crime?"

In the 18 months leading up to Jan. 1, 2013, the 61 license plate readers operating in the state at the time did a lot of recording. A VPR study of public information from local, state and federal law enforcement showed that during that time period, police across the state logged 7.9 million license plates and stored them in a central, statewide database along with the time and location they were scanned.

Despite the financial investment in the systems, they were helpful in solving fewer than five crimes in 2013. The number of tickets written for driving with a suspended license and driving with an expired registration (two violations that ALPRs can detect) hasn’t gone up since the technology was introduced in mid-2009.

Millions of plates. Five (5) crimes solved. Number of tickets issued flat.

So, what do you do? As a legislator who approved funding for this, do you accept this as part of the learning curve or do you demand more from the technology? Do you tell the public, "We appreciate your input but feel that a literal handful of successful criminal investigations far outweighs any privacy issues or budgetary concerns"?

An interview with an officer who uses the ALPR system adds some nuance to the discussion, including the fact that law enforcement's civil liberties precautions contribute to the perceived inefficiency of the system. But underneath it all, it's viewed as just another "tool" for local law enforcement to use, albeit one that can't seem to pull its own weight. No one wants to say the equipment is non-essential or possibly redundant, but the officer interviewed (Sergeant Cram) makes this damning statement.

Despite the $25,000 tool, Cram says the majority of the Winooski Police Department’s traffic stops are still done the old-fashioned way, with officers stopping drivers for infractions like rolling through a stop sign or failing to yield at a crosswalk.

Still, Cram says the federally-funded ALPR is a valuable tool, even though he doesn’t think the city would have put up $25,000 of its own money to buy one.

The city wouldn't have ended up with one if the DHS wasn't giving them away. That's how extraneous this "tool" is. The lack of successful criminal investigations backs this up. The fact that traffic enforcement has remained stagnant even with the addition of several million plate scans per year is the final nail in the coffin.

No one -- at least not in Vermont -- needs this technology. But if someone else is willing to pay, they'll take it. And they'll use it. And years down the road, they'll likely still have nothing to show for it but a massive database tracking the movement of millions of non-criminals.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: alpr, crimes, license plate reader, license plates, vermont

30 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 3:45pm

Free lunch
The initial investment may be *free*, but what about the maintenance, training, and resources needed to maintain it? The only winners here are the manufacturers who now have a steady revenue stream.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Chris Brand, 30 Oct 2014 @ 3:50pm

Five isn't "fewer than five"
"they were helpful in solving fewer than five crimes in 2013"
Seems likely that the answer is actually "somewhere between none and four", with some debate as to which of those four count. Otherwise, you'd think they'd state the actual number.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Get off my cyber-lawn! (profile), 30 Oct 2014 @ 3:55pm

A better use of taxpayer money
would be POWERBALL tickets.....the odds of picking the numbers appear to be better than those of actually catching a criminal using this system!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 30 Oct 2014 @ 3:58pm

Re: Five isn't "fewer than five"
Clearly they can't give the actual number for 'National Security: Because Terrorists!(tm)' reasons, as if criminals knew how completely useless the system was at anything more than tracking non-criminals, it would embolden them to commit even more crimes. /s
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 4:06pm

driving with a suspended license and driving with an expired registration (two violations that ALPRs can detect)

"Who is driving the car" is not determined by the license plate. Why would someone think an ALPR would be better at it than a red light camera?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 4:22pm

but those 5 criminals would have gotten away with their crimes and probably others as well!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 4:32pm

How long until the license plate reader database is cross-referenced with the vehicles belonging to individuals who are considered to likely be carrying large amounts of cash in order to enable law enforcement to conduct a random stop and happen upon some assets to seize, you know, because of drug-trafficking terrorist child pornography!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 30 Oct 2014 @ 4:54pm

Re:
What makes you think they care about accuracy? Fighting a ticket or fine takes money, and it takes time, most people will just pay rather than deal with the hassle of contesting it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kenneth Michaels, 30 Oct 2014 @ 5:06pm

Who needs cameras when a phone app will do?
Every cop just needs to download this smart app and let the cloud do the rest!

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=nvlsmcclient.apis

That app is for law enforcement only. When will we get an app for law abiding citizens?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 5:10pm

Sharing is Caring
I love this quote from the app description:

"All LPR data acquired by the NVLS Mobile Companion may be shared with 10's of thousands of already registered and active Law Enforcement NVLS users. The NVLS network of LPR based information sharing has proven to be impactful for thousands of LEAs and LEOs across the country."

How about an app just for tracking law enforcement license plates?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 5:13pm

Re: Who needs cameras when a phone app will do?
When will we get an app for law abiding citizens?

What's this "law-abiding citizen" you are talking about? Is that a euphemism for closet criminals?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 7:35pm

Just In Case (tm).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Paraquat (profile), 30 Oct 2014 @ 7:54pm

What were the five crimes that were solved?
Just wondering what the five crimes were. Smoking a joint? Spitting on the sidewalk? Failure to file a tax return?

Inquiring minds want to know.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 8:15pm

Perhaps the problem doesn't lie with the technology, but the mental capacities and social stability of officers:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/court-oks-barring-high-iqs-cops/story?id=95836

Apparently, cadets with high IQs are denied completion...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 8:19pm

Re: Re: Who needs cameras when a phone app will do?
No, it's 'euphemism' for cops who break the law.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 8:29pm

Re: Re:
Traffic violations can make your issuance rates go up. I've had to fight off 5 tickets this year because of bogus tickets being slapped on my car.

For example, I was parked in one place that was clearly marked as a no parking zone from the hours of 7am-9am yet I got ticketed even though I parked there at around 11am. It was even noted on the ticket that it was issued between the hours of 11am-12pm. Yet they expect me to play stupid and pay up?

I don't think so!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 8:35pm

Re: Re: Re:
I swear, in the cities...Most of the court time in certain areas is taken up by law abiding citizens fighting bogus tickets. This is most evident in areas consisting of upper class citizens.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 30 Oct 2014 @ 8:52pm

Re:
They don't need that. There's a little thing called Civil Forfeitures which basically allows cops to place anything you own under arrest...including your couch.

I know it sounds out-landish, but it's affecting over 60 thousand people per year all of which who have not been convicted of a crime. In other words, a cop has the legal authority to rob you fucking blind without due process.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Capitan Capitan, 30 Oct 2014 @ 9:07pm

Success unlocked
Seriously everything is becoming more and more like a game!, people are just making shit up without any justification at all, funny that makes more fascist laws.

If we legislate for the edge case we will fuck everyone else.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 30 Oct 2014 @ 9:52pm

Re:
'But New London police interviewed only candidates who scored 20 to 27, on the theory that those who scored too high could get bored with police work and leave soon after undergoing costly training.'

Wait, that's the excuse they use, 'they might get bored and leave'? Seriously? That would be ridiculously easy to deal with, just set a cost for the training, and then have each month/year of employment with the police count towards paying that back. If they stay employed long enough(5 years perhaps), then the officer breaks even, and can leave if they want without paying anything. If they leave before that for another job, then they have to pay off what's left.

Voila, no risk of someone taking advantage of free training to pad their resume and leaving right afterwards.

Honestly, they might as well come out with the actual reason, that they don't want to employ anyone smart enough that they might start asking questions, leave the laughable excuses at home.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2014 @ 12:13am

Re: Re:
That's actually exactly what I was referring to. I'm suggesting that the police might at some point try to use the license plate database to specifically target those likely to be carrying large amounts of cash for the purposes of civil forfeiture, rather than having to stop random people and guess who might be likely to carry large amounts of cash.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Felix Atagong (profile), 31 Oct 2014 @ 3:14am

One chance in one million and a half...
Seems about my odds being laid on a Friday evening, I'll take it anytime!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2014 @ 6:34am

Not to worry
No problem, with the RFID chips they are putting into license plates, they won't need the ALPRs any more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 31 Oct 2014 @ 11:25am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
I haven't needed to in quite some time so things may have changed, but up here in Canada we have what's called the Crown Procescutor. When you're going up for a ticket in court and have compelling evidence to fight your case you can bring it in front the the crown prosecutor (basically a meeting in an office) and they will likely compromise for you or throw your ticket out.

This practice was brought forth to keep court cases down to only the one that really needed to be heard before a judge and keeping mistakes or things that can be logically talked out from seeing court and clogging the system/time/money of everyone.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rick Caird, 31 Oct 2014 @ 11:52am

Re: Free lunch
And, those cameras are expensive (as I recall $30K/per) and they go down frequently. There is also the networking requirement which usually means wireless and outdoor grade wireless routers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jablonski, 31 Oct 2014 @ 12:00pm

It's not the LPRs on their own that are bad, although that is bad enough. It's that commercial services are aggregating the LPR data and selling that to cops. So while one jurisdiction may have some record of your presence, all they need to do is pay a nominal fee to be able to track you (albeit still in patchwork fashion) around all the jurisdictions.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
GEMont (profile), 31 Oct 2014 @ 3:43pm

Welcome to Amerika - the Home of the Watched
"...a massive database tracking the movement of millions of non-criminals"

And that is the actual purpose of the devices, in a nut-shell.

Run together with all the other databases from other units across Amerika, it gives somebody a really nice computer generated panorama of where everyone goes, when and for how long, every day.

The blackmail possibilities alone would pay for the equipment in five years... had the AIP actually paid for it out of their own pocket, instead of making taxpayer's foot the bill as usual.

AIP = Assholes In Power

And don't get me wrong, this is indeed being done specifically for security purposes.

The security of the 1% that is.

---
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That One Guy (profile), 31 Oct 2014 @ 4:11pm

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
That system needs to be spread to other countries so very badly, though given it would likely put a good number of lawyers out of business, I imagine they would fight like mad to block it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2014 @ 3:14pm

It's about control...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael Price, 24 Nov 2014 @ 2:55pm

Re: Fighting bogus tickets
"This is most evident in areas consisting of upper class citizens."
Because the poor just eat it. But hey statists, tell me again how concerned you are for the "disadvantaged".
[ link to this | view in thread ]