3

For advocates like Lucy Parsons Labs’ Martinez, however, the ultimate solution to ALPRs is the complete abolition of them, not measures made with the intent to improve the existing system.

“I don’t care if they’re secure or not, I don’t want them in my backyard,” Martinez said. “What we’ve seen with these surveillance technologies is that the harms are so great and that all of the ways people have tried to rein them in are so ineffective. If you care about civil liberties, if you care about human rights, if you care about all of these things, you’re going to end up in a place where the answer is ‘we have to just tear these things up.’”

top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] N0t_5ure@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

ALPRs are just one small part of the surveillance state, and even if you were to trust the state with absolute surveillance, it is virtually impossible to prevent bad actors with government employment from abusing the technology to stalk and harass people. There are plenty of documented cases of police and others with access to these tool using them to harm people like ex-wives, etc. I personally have been subjected to a long-term (multi-year) campaign of stalking and harassment by people with access to state-owned surveillance technologies, with the goal being to drive me to suicide, and I know I am not the only one. It was a complete nightmare.

[-] harrys_balzac@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 1 week ago

Welp, crossing Minneapolis off the list of potential relocation targets. Minnesota, on the whole, still looking good, though.

this post was submitted on 15 Apr 2026
3 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy

9626 readers
17 users here now

A community for Lemmy users interested in privacy

Rules:

  1. Be civil
  2. No spam posting
  3. Keep posts on-topic
  4. No trolling

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS