Industry


Ads by TechWords

See your link here


Douglas Schweitzer's picture
Douglas Schweitzer

The Security Sector

Car 54 where are you? Does GPS stand for Good Police Surveillance?

First it was parents installing GPSs to keep tabs on their teenagers' driving habits -- and plenty of people, especially teens, were indignant. Now it seems police in numerous jurisdictions have been using that technology to help them do their jobs as well. Recently, crafty crime fighters in Fairfax County and Alexandria put a GPS device on a suspected molester's van and tracked his movements, which eventually led to his arrest.

When I starting reading Ben Hubbard's Washington Post article about the use of this tactic by law enforcement, it immediately raised my hackles. But then, as I read on I saw beyond what's on the surface. Not surprisingly, the police aren't too forthcoming about some of the specifics of using GPS to get criminals, but I do have to agree that in some ways it's like having a cop tailing a suspect.  Only it's even more accurate and doesn't call for the manpower that following a suspect requires. That in turn saves taxpayer money.

I think that, like it or not, American residents are going to have to accept that we're pretty much under constant surveillance. Security cameras not only at banks and retail stores, hotels, office buildings, elevators, parking garages, schools, gas stations, convenience stores and street intersections and toll booths are now commonplace and can easily be called upon if needed in an investigation. While those cameras have their focus on an entire swath of our population, they can nevertheless be used to pinpoint just one individual if need be. GPS on one person's car seems so much more invasive, but is it really?

What People Are Saying

if that so., then people

if that so., then people should start installing GPS & monroe strut assembly too. It's interesting to see how technology innovations can resolve community problems such as crime, car burglary, etc.

My knee jerk response to

My knee jerk response to this is .... Like phone taps require court order in order to be entered into evidence so should the GPS track, intercept of cell calls. If not court approved the toss the evidence.

"John Spartan, you are fined ..."

Once police and politicians understand what GPS can do for them, there will be a move to mandate it on all vehicles.

There has been a recurring, but so far unsuccessful, campaign in Massachusetts to make EVERY road a toll road and force all residents to use a GPS toll device to monitor where and when they drive. The thinking is that by charging higher tolls for driving on congested roads at peak times, people will time shift their travels or find alternate routes (as if there were any).

The reasoning behind this is simple - MONEY. The state will see it as a windfall and exploit it ruthlessly. Not just for tolls, but for tickets as well. I expect speed limits will be randomly changed just to confuse and catch unwary drivers. Once every vehicle has time monitored GPS, tickets for violations of speed limits or stop signs or traffic signals or parking or Massachusett's famous come-and-go highway lanes will become fully automatic, probably with a ticket dispenser set right in the vehicle just as in the movie "Demolition Man".

And ignorance won't be an excuse. I'll bet that if you travel through the state with no GPS toll device, you'll be fined for not having one in addition to paying the tolls.

I'd have to say it's a 4th ammendment violation

If it's without a warrant.

Technology can enhance the capabilities of a law enforcement organization but placing a GPS device on a person's vehicle brings up the same questions about whether GPS data from a person's cell phone is protected similar to their person.

Legally, there isn't any case or written law establishing whether geolocation data is protected if it comes from a cell phone (the person is an owner of a device receiving service from a 3rd party - 3rd party doctrine intervening in this case). However, the planting of a device to track a person's movements/whereabouts surrepiticiously is a very slippery slope (and a steeply angled one at that) which I think will get the usual suspect civil liberty lawyers involved.

I can't say I personally agree with the legal standing a PD would use to justify the placement of a device w/o the authority or affirmation of a court order.

As you said it "saves money" for the PD in policing society but if this is the justification you're going to use for that then what's stopping a PD from insisting on all residents being issued watches/ankle bands with the same technology? What about a step further away from that and a GPS on all vehicles?

Either option does not appeal to me and I'll not be living in that municipality.

Enjoy!