License plate reader searches should require a warrant

Post by otterley » Fri, Aug 14, 2026, 4:37 PM UTC

estearum wrote: post #419

otterley wrote: post #418

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The fact that we are reading this differently is an existence proof that there are multiple ways to interpret the conversation and the points being made within. We should be mindful of that and respond accordingly, perhaps asking more questions instead of being combative.

You are the only person who made an assumption (a probably-incorrect one) and then was combative about it. People on general message boards talking about state surveillance powers are not generally crafting trial strategies. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49294009 > they are not wrong [per my interpretation] > you are therefore a dick I think between 1 lawyer and 2 laypeople talking about law, it's quite likely…

Post by Cider9986 » Sun, Aug 16, 2026, 4:17 PM UTC

lern_too_spel wrote: post #391

Cider9986 wrote: post #187

A warrant is better than no warrant, but: A warrant requirement is not a reasonable bandaid to consider allowing mass spying. There should be no mass spying by default. A warrant requirement makes sense for something like the locations of customers on cellular networks, because, although it should be improved, it's been built into the tech. When you make the optional choice to create mass spying, safeguards do not ma…

This should be up to the citizens. If you're living in Oakland with rampant theft and illegal dumping, it's a reasonable trade-off to allow tracking down perpetrators with a warrant. Most people would not agree to allowing police to do arbitrary searches of that data without a warrant.