• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Does Mandating license plates violate " Our right to Privacy"?

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Yet again I must ask...
WHAT personal information may be gleaned by John Q. Citizen by reading the numbers/letters on a car plate?

Probably none, it is not john Q, that concerns me, it is over reaching government...

I gave you the courtesy of a reply, now please lend me the same courtesy, Are you or were you a LEO or Government actor? Yes or No will suffice.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
You don't think people recognize who you are? Take pictures? Ask others "Who is that?"

Simple solution~~just stay at home.
From your ignorant reply, I can only assume that you are a "coward" or possess an above average amount of " vacuity".. But wait, you were actually part of the scam that I am attempting to expose.."You worked for tyrants and thieves and earned your bread from the labor of others".
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Probably none, it is not john Q, that concerns me, it is over reaching government...

I gave you the courtesy of a reply, now please lend me the same courtesy, Are you or were you a LEO or Government actor? Yes or No will suffice.
I'd rather tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. See Post #48.
I'm not quite sure how you're going to verify it, or what good it does for me to make any statement that you cannot ascertain the veracity of though.
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Yes however one is not required to wear a license tag around their neck..
.

Now you're just being silly.

How much damage is typically inflicted by a person walking down the street compared to how much damage is done by a automobile not properly controlled?

Furthermore, as a natural person you have fairly unique identifying features should you choose to engage in some unlawful activity and then flee. Odds are nobody else in the world looks just like you. Identical twins are rare, identical triplets very rare. Any particular automobile, OTOH, may well look virtually identical to thousands of other autos of the same make and model.

I do note that laws against wearig a mask in public are not uncommon in this nation or others.

We also note that the anonymity of the internet tends to bring out the worst in human communications and interactions.

Citizen has touched upon the difference between the court invented pseduo-right of "privacy" vs the constitutional guarantee to be secure in one's person, papers, and effects. I would be interested in whatever historic information anyone has on actual privacy in the US Colonial and early Republic periods. In other words, was it routinely accepted for strangers to wander around towns and villages as strangers? Or was one expected to make introductions and identify himself?

I suspect "privacy" or rather "anonymity" as a practical matter didn't much exist until urbanization created large cities where people did not know each other and did not expect to know each other. Even then, I suspect that for a time, in individual neighborhoods or ghettos anonymity was not often available for long.

But I'd love any info others have on this theory.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
Some states/municipalities require that if a vehicle is not licensed (both state and municipality), operative, and inspected then it may only be stored in a 3 sided (or more) enclosure or fitted with a car cover even if on your own property....and only one such vehicle.

Part of the info trail on one such example:
http://www.chesterfield.gov/content2.aspx?id=16788

Such municiple ordinances (are there actually any States with State laws in this regard, or is this a local matter only? I'd start with Indiana if I were looking for over-bearing vehicle laws.) tend to be a cop-out way of addressing junk vehicles without being accused of "racism". If a vehicle can't be legally driven on the street, it might be a junker that shouldn't be stored on the front lawn.

My city has such an ordinance. There is also at least one Utah Supreme Court case that calls into question the enforcabling of that ordinance. The city enforces on a "complaint basis" only, and generally against those who lack the resources to fight them. I'd love to seem them try to enforce against the racing enthusist who has a couple of perfectly running, non-street legal races parked on his property in an otherwise acceptable manner.

Outside of zoned cities, I've never seen such an ordinance and unregistered vehicles are routinely owned, stored, and operated on private land without any question whatsoever. In fact, in Utah, most farm equipment need not be registered at all and can be legally operated on all public roads other than InterState freeways by anyone who can do so safely, without regard to age or licensure. As a practical matter, tractors and hay haulers tend not to be high speed getaway vehicles, and are more likely to be damaged by someone else rear ending them than to be the ones inflictinng damage on others.

Charles
 

utbagpiper

Banned
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
4,061
Location
Utah
...
Today, one of the touch-stones of court analysis on the Fourth Amendment (search and seizure) is privacy. Their analysis includes the question whether a person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in this or that. If the court finds he does, the search--and whatever it discovered--may be invalidated and suppressed. One of the way's the courts analyze whether a person had a "reasonable" expectation of privacy is to examine whether "society" would recognize or agree with that "expectation of privacy."

Well that author I read several years ago pointed out something. The Fourth Amendment doesn't mention privacy; it mentions security. "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects..."

....

I appreciate this post as I too have long believed there was an important distinction between privacy and security. Privacy tends to imply anonymity. Security, suggests something different. I don't think security guarantees anonymity at all. In fact, I suspect that at the practical level, there was very little anonymity to be had in Colonial America and the early USA. There still isn't in most rural areas. Anonymity is a condition of urban areas.

OTOH, security does suggest a right to control and prevent seizure or misuse of my property even if the nature of that property is not concealed.

This has real implications in our modern world. Think about how much personal information is voluntarily shared with social media, or commercial vendors of various goods and services. One has no privacy for that data in such cases. But does one retain some level of security (ownership, control, etc) of the data even if it has not been kept secret? Copyright and patent law certainly supports the notion that one does.

A couple of years back, MIT's Technology Review magazine had an article discussing the need for a new paradigm for "privacy" the on-line, digital, social media age. I'lll see if I can find it later. If I recall, the thesis was that we needed to move away from the notion that anything not secret was no longer private. Instead, we needed to adopt a paradigm that government (and others) should be limited in how they can use another's data even if they have access to that data. The author argued that in many cases it was no longer possible to keep data secret, and so we needed to drop that as the standard for controlling data.

I think the article I remember was "The Real Privacy Problem" by Evgeny Morozov in the Oct 22, 2013 issue of Technology Review. (I think it can be accessed without a subscription.) It argues for introducing ethical and monetary aspects to using someone's data; a little different thesis than I remembered. And the author never discusses "security"in contrast to "privacy". But the fact that he addresses privacy as something other than just the ability to keep data secret was fascinating to me, and still is. It is a good read for those interested.

Charles
 
Last edited:

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
. Any particular automobile, OTOH, may well look virtually identical to thousands of other autos of the same make and model.other. Even then, I suspect that for a time, in individual neighborhoods or ghettos anonymity was not often available for long.

But I'd love any info others have on this theory.

Charles

As with all laws that started out simple vehicle registration and Driver's licenses have evolved into something totally different the what they started out to be.

Registration at first was just a way to make sure the users of the highways were paying for them that is fairly simple and has no need to ID the owner.

But as vehicles became more common and criminals found out that stealing them was very profitable, a way for determining who actual owned them was developed titles and VIN numbers.

Then because there are enough people out there who don't give a rats behind about any body besides themselves a more positive way of identifying who was operating them was also developed photo id.

If every body was honest and willing to take responsibility for their actions a lot of this wouldn't be needed.

But here are many out there who are very willing to leave a accident or do others things, crimes ect. with out sticking around.

As a LEO I ran into them daily people who don't give a rats behind about anybody else. Those people are more then willing to hurt you, steal your belongings, leave you sitting in your vehicle hurt, bleeding, dying and walk away.

The mistake a lot of good honest law abiding, conservative, moral, honest people make is believing that every body has same values that they have.

Well I hate to break it to you they don't, the only thing some care about is themselves and how they can get ahead and get by not being held responsible for their actions.

The more mobile our societies have become the harder it has become to ID and make these people accountable for their actions.

So we end up with more and more laws trying to stop and control these amoral people and these same laws have a negative effect on the honest moral people also.

And if I had the perfect answer to this I would be very wealthy and not sitting here typing on my computer.
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
As with all laws that started out simple vehicle registration and Driver's licenses have evolved into something totally different the what they started out to be.

Registration at first was just a way to make sure the users of the highways were paying for them that is fairly simple and has no need to ID the owner.

But as vehicles became more common and criminals found out that stealing them was very profitable, a way for determining who actual owned them was developed titles and VIN numbers.

Then because there are enough people out there who don't give a rats behind about any body besides themselves a more positive way of identifying who was operating them was also developed photo id.

If every body was honest and willing to take responsibility for their actions a lot of this wouldn't be needed.

But here are many out there who are very willing to leave a accident or do others things, crimes ect. with out sticking around.

As a LEO I ran into them daily people who don't give a rats behind about anybody else. Those people are more then willing to hurt you, steal your belongings, leave you sitting in your vehicle hurt, bleeding, dying and walk away.

The mistake a lot of good honest law abiding, conservative, moral, honest people make is believing that every body has same values that they have.

Well I hate to break it to you they don't, the only thing some care about is themselves and how they can get ahead and get by not being held responsible for their actions.

The more mobile our societies have become the harder it has become to ID and make these people accountable for their actions.

So we end up with more and more laws trying to stop and control these amoral people and these same laws have a negative effect on the honest moral people also.

And if I had the perfect answer to this I would be very wealthy and not sitting here typing on my computer.

Thank you for your reply.. As a LEO how would you feel if a private citizen wanted to take pictures or video of your personal automobile?

Thank you for servicing and protecting, I look forward to your honest reply.

Regards
CCJ
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
Thank you for your reply.. As a LEO how would you feel if a private citizen wanted to take pictures or video of your personal automobile?

Thank you for servicing and protecting, I look forward to your honest reply.

Regards
CCJ

When I am out on the public road ways there is nothing I can do if some one wants to take my picture. if they come into the yard after travrling over private land for a couple hundred yards that is a different story
 
Last edited:

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
When I am out on the public road ways there is nothing I can do if some one wants to take my picture. if they come into the yard after travrling over private land for a couple hundred yards that is a different story
Not your picture, a picture of your personal license plates..

Again let me be more specific, If joe citizen was standing on public property say on the public walkway outside the employee parking lot at the police station and said citizen was video taping folks entering and leaving in their vehicles, would you are any members of your department have an issue with the actions of joe citizen? Keep in mind that joe citizen is on public property and exercising his/her 1st amendment right..

If yes, why? if no? Than no explanation is needed.. Again I thank you for your reply.

Regards
 

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Again let me be more specific, If joe citizen was standing on public property say on the public walkway outside the employee parking lot at the police station and said citizen was video taping folks entering and leaving in their vehicles, would you are any members of your department have an issue with the actions of joe citizen? Keep in mind that joe citizen is on public property and exercising his/her 1st amendment right..
Not that it was addressed to me, but aside from the emotional impact what is the difference between recording with a video camera and physically observing someone/something down and making a note with pen and paper? Or, for that matter committing a license tag to memory?

That said, there are dozens of Youtube videos where Officer Friendly has gotten a hair up his butt from private citizens doing exactly that (videotaping/recording) and the police seem to have lost almost every time. It would seem the courts agree that there is legally No Expectation of Privacy in regards to things in the public view.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
Not that it was addressed to me, but aside from the emotional impact what is the difference between recording with a video camera and physically observing someone/something down and making a note with pen and paper? Or, for that matter committing a license tag to memory?

That said, there are dozens of Youtube videos where Officer Friendly has gotten a hair up his butt from private citizens doing exactly that (videotaping/recording) and the police seem to have lost almost every time. It would seem the courts agree that there is legally No Expectation of Privacy in regards to things in the public view.

Saved me the time, it only makes sense. If privacy is applied in public to private citizens it will also be applied to government agents. It would be a really stupid move.

It is called 'public' for a reason.
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Not that it was addressed to me, but aside from the emotional impact what is the difference between recording with a video camera and physically observing someone/something down and making a note with pen and paper? Or, for that matter committing a license tag to memory?

That said, there are dozens of Youtube videos where Officer Friendly has gotten a hair up his butt from private citizens doing exactly that (videotaping/recording) and the police seem to have lost almost every time. It would seem the courts agree that there is legally No Expectation of Privacy in regards to things in the public view.

Yes indeed, you are totally correct, LEOs understand that their plates give personal info to any wacko that wish to do them ill will, hence my argument that the government is supporting criminals by mandating that license plates be applied in plan view.. Many folks are not aware of said danger but clearly LEO and reasonable thinking folks are well aware of the danger, the problem is attempting to have the state or DMV remove this antiquated dangerous system..

I actually watched one of those videos that you mentioned on u tube the other night, a pro liberty well versed in constitutional law citizen was video recording a federal building and the coming and goings of the employee parking lot, well the whole FBI office or so it seemed appeared on scene, the citizen was cool as a cucumber and refused under threat of arrest to surrender his ID, he knew he was not in violation of any laws and that he was simply exercising his 1st amendment right.. FBI decided to video him and they both had a standoff, eventually he just walk off..

Regards Sir!
 

countryclubjoe

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2013
Messages
2,505
Location
nj
Saved me the time, it only makes sense. If privacy is applied in public to private citizens it will also be applied to government agents. It would be a really stupid move.

It is called 'public' for a reason.

government actors have no expectation of privacy while working. They are required to give their name and badge number, however a law abiding citizen out and about is not required to surrender his/her ID simply because a government actor demands said ID..

Government actors has you are well aware work for the citizens it is called " public servants'..
 
Last edited:

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
government actors have no expectation of privacy while working. They are required to give their name and badge number, however a law abiding citizen out and about is not required to surrender his/her ID simply because a government actor demands said ID..

Government actors has you are well aware work for the citizens it is called " public servants'..

They do in private, and the courts have so ruled. Only when in public do they have no expectation of privacy.

Cite where they are required to give their name, and badge number?
 
Last edited:

Fallschirjmäger

Active member
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
3,823
Location
Cumming, Georgia, USA
Cite where they are required to give their name, and badge number?
Oh, oh, OH! I know!! That's the one where if a hooker asks a prospective john if he's a cop and what his badge number is, he has to tell her, right?

Yes indeed, you are totally correct, LEOs understand that their plates give personal info to any wacko that wish to do them ill will... (snip)

So, um... I got's to ask. What 'personal info' is available to 'any wacko'?
Can he get the name and address of the car's registered owner?
If Officer Friendly is undercover, will that blow his cover identity?
Will Fred finally kiss Daphne?
 
Last edited:

XD40sc

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2013
Messages
402
Location
NC
Driving is a privileged, not a right.

Walk, ride a bike, ride public transportation and your identity is safe.
 

WalkingWolf

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2011
Messages
11,930
Location
North Carolina
government actors have no expectation of privacy while working. They are required to give their name and badge number, however a law abiding citizen out and about is not required to surrender his/her ID simply because a government actor demands said ID..

Government actors has you are well aware work for the citizens it is called " public servants'..

Government employees have the same rights regarding their person as all of the people. Where do you come up with this BS? Please provide citations?
 

Firearms Iinstuctor

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 12, 2011
Messages
3,428
Location
northern wis
I guess I don't know what it is like to be an anonymous LEO I lived and work small towns and rural areas.

Every body knew who I was an a large number knew where I lived, heck I even live on a road name after my family.

I make a heck of lot more friends working then I ever did enemies.

I looked after my neighbors and they looked after me. If any body strange was asking about where I lived I would soon hear about.

Then if l saw any body strange around any of there places I would find out what they were up to.

Many times during my career neighbors would stop by and asked for help with things like vehicle registrations ect.

There is a huge different working rural law enforcement then big urban areas I am sure.

When I started I was one of six deputies in one of the largest area sized counties in the state, population wise we were not that big.

Even today people I only had Law enforcement contact with stop me as ask how my retirement is going.

Sure there are those I don't ever want to see again and would be very glad I was armed if I did see them but over all I get along well with every body.
 
Top