Missouri governor orders guardrails on Flock cameras and ALPRs

nemomarx

This all seems like good and sensible restrictions. Cutting down on how long data can be stored helps with privacy in an cases, and making sure the data isn't being sold or shared with anyone but the state should at least cut off some misuse from private orgs.

petcat

Go even further and just adopt the New Hampshire law which doesn't even allow "non-hit" license plate images or records to be transferred off the camera device itself and must be deleted locally within 3 minutes.

Cider9986

We don't need mass surveillance with guardrails, we need no mass surveillance. This is good, though, unless it prevents getting rid of mass surveillance.

fortran77

Restricting private use of ALPR cameras? I don't like that. I like the protection our ALPR cameras give us. I moved to Missouri recently because I got sick of the crime and corruption in California. I think these "guardrails" go too far.

calvinmorrison

fundementally we need to rethink what rights there are in public. We could start with "make photography totally illegal in public, or rewrite what we mean 'expectation of privacy' or what rules we have because the technology demands this.

iamnothere

Good to see the “and ALPRs” added. Flock is not the only game in town, and many cities are switching to other vendors while saying that they dumped Flock. P.S. to the “Flock is YC” guy: everyone posting here knows. You’re not adding anything to the conversation.

fred_is_fred

"Kehoe encouraged local agencies to voluntarily commit to those practices when possible under existing contracts and laws". So in other words, nothing happened.