This is a question about whether we feel people have a right to privacy over a right to driving a car. Because the assumption that it’s either police pulling people over (which is also a questionable “necessity”) or constant surveillance accessible by malicious state actors raises questions.
Here in Germany traffic enforcement cameras are very common. But they only take a photo if someone runs a red light or violates the speed limit. There is no constant surveillance of every passing car.
Here in America the police are using ring light cameras to track and jail protestors. I can’t speak to the political situation in Germany, but in the United States we are in the midst of a Facism problem. www.forbes.com/sites/thomas...
Privacy for cars isn't on the table. All cars using public roads are required to register with their state of residence and display a license plate for identification. There's an entire licensing regime for driving a car, not a right.
You are misunderstanding my point. If the surveillance devices are only capturing traffic violations by cars, with a transparent use and deletion protocol then you have a point. However - since the cameras are capable of capturing more and there is no public access to these cameras - abolish cars.
Library fines are maybe suboptimal but it's not a privacy violation. License plate readers are used in undesirable ways sometimes but the viral articles ~never focus on narrow reform, because the target audience is dangerous drivers who want blanket permission to drive however they want.
If we’re concerned about dangerous drivers abolish cars or make licensing so burdensome that people cannot drive in populated areas. Peoples dangerous driving doesn’t justify surveillance of communities.
Yes that would be good!! Shame how few criticisms of cameras using progressive terminology start by demanding the government severely restrict car use. Maybe the massive harm of driving, especially on marginalized groups, is shrugged off because of who's actually harmed by enforcement?
That and people treat car usage like it’s covered under the 2nd amendment.