Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I'm not a lawcel so my opinion is worthless, but you don't have an expectation of privacy with your license plates in public.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

expwctation of privacy isnt the issue here. Instead its whether the governments survaillence aparatus is improperly chilling people's right to freedom of movement when they know the government is tracking all their movements. idk the cuz IANAL

https://media.tenor.com/nGXtYz474ZEAAAAx/labimbosillycone-anus.webp

!slots300

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots 100

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots200

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots 200

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots 400

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

!slots 800

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

But reading the article, a court recently stopped Baltimore from using drones for aerial surveillance, so again, my opinion is worthless

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

drones and fixed cameras are very different things

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You have no expectation of privacy if your face can be recognized in public so city facial recognition system should be okay as well.

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Lots of places use it so it hasn't been deemed unconstitutional (yet) :marseyshrug:

Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Link copied to clipboard
Action successful!
Error, please refresh the page and try again.