CCTV Network Tracks Getaway Car 434
An anonymous reader writes "The BBC is reporting that a 'pioneering number plate recognition system in Bradford played a vital role in the arrests of six suspects' after the murder of a Policewoman - within minutes of Friday's shootings, police were using the system to track the suspected getaway car." From the article: "When a car is entered on the system it will 'ping' whenever it passes one of our cameras, which makes it a lot easier to track than waiting for a patrol car to spot it."
Shooting?? I thought the UK had strict gun control (Score:0, Interesting)
Re:I for one (Score:3, Interesting)
No ... because 12 out of the last 13 people hung later turned out to be innocent.
A good portion of the people murdered in Britian have been murdered by police: google "table leg" or "Menezes". I believe in the USA 75% of police shot are either shot with their own gun or by another policeman, so arming the police is not the answer either.
Re:So many ways to get around??? (Score:3, Interesting)
This is why I use.... (Score:4, Interesting)
Secure Beneath the Watchful Eyes (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:You live in a police state: Rejoice! (Score:4, Interesting)
Its a lot easier to rob a bank and flee the country when the police all go after your "Getaway Car" in London while you take the train to Calais.
It's also a lot easier to find those pesky activists that don't like cameras everywhere.
Or round up undesirables for imprisonment.
Or single out your rival.
Or stalk your ex.
Or find a diplomat's motorcade.
Re:Shooting?? I thought the UK had strict gun cont (Score:1, Interesting)
211 Miles??? (Score:3, Interesting)
1: Commit crime
2: Drive to least favorite relative's house
2: Loan car to (for me anyway) sister-in-law, who borrows everything & returns nothing, for vacation trip
3: Laugh for a very long time while she tries to prove she's innocent.
2 cents,
Queen B
Fake plates (Score:5, Interesting)
If you are going to commit a crime, make sure you pick up a 10-pack of fake plates and switch them out randomly during your arrival and your getaway. Even better if the fakes use valid numbers off other vehicles in the same vicinity giving the coppers two nearby "pings" to choose from. They don't even have to be high-quality fakes, just enough to fool the cameras and anyone else looking at them from a distance.
Re:You live in a police state: Rejoice! (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Shooting?? I thought the UK had strict gun cont (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Reflective license plates?? (Score:4, Interesting)
Numerous methods of speed camera avoidance have been tested: hairspray, cling film (PVC film), refraction grid plate covers, etc. Absolutely none of them work.
However, my dad did come up with a couple of really good ideas to counter them. As the use of radar jammers (as opposed to detectors) is illegal, you need to disrupt the photo process. The cameras that use white flashes would be easiest to disrupt. Mount a photographic slave flash trigger above the numberplate, connected and adjacent to two fast-charging flash guns. Speed camera flashes, slave trigger fires and the two numberplate flash guns go off. Result: one completely over-exposed photo with the number plate hopefully obscured by a white smear.
For the infra-red cameras, drill a few holes at random in the plate and mount a number of high-intensity infra-red LEDs in the holes. Not sure how effective this would be, but it would certainly make life a bit more difficult for the people looking at the pics.
Re:Terrorist don't wear seatbelts! (Score:3, Interesting)
Sure, but they can use virtually ANY excuse to pull you over if they see/think that you don't have it on. Oops, that car weaved a little to the left, better pull them over type of thing. The difference between a primary/seconday crime is really how convenient it is for the police to enforce it (or how much of a cover story they need...)
In other words, the difference between primary and secondary traffic infractions is rather meaningless. About as useful as the words "probable cause" related to traffic searches-if they need it or want it, they'll get it. It may bite them in the rear end later after you spend lots of money on a lawyer of course.....
Not bad at all (Score:5, Interesting)
You are anthropomorphizing the data (I refuse to make the obvious joke). The data itself is not bad or good. The data is just data, another tool.
What is bad or good is the procedures by which this data is accessed, the uses to which it is put.
The real question is - is this tool too powerful to exist? I do not think so as long as there is oversight in it's use, because it can do a lot of real good - as in the case of the killers being caught, or (potentially) a vast reduction in stolen cars.
People like to argue that the genie is out of the bottle in regards to filesharing. Well, the genie of pervasive monitoring is so close to out as to make no difference. So we as humanity must adjust and figure out how we are to live with this very powerful tool, and make it serve us instead of fearing it just as the RIAA and ilk must figure how to live in a world when anything can be copied. This situation may seem dissimilar but it is not; something you do not wish to happen is becoming prevalent so instead of a futile battle to stop what cannot be stopped, figure out what leverage you have to control its use.
Some people also claim the UK is now a "Police State". They are mistaken; the difference between a police state and this is that in a Police State is that you are always being WATCHED (or be made to think you are). In the case of the modern UK your public actions are constantly being RECORDED. There is a huge difference between activity and passivity.
If a system is passive and takes no action without direction, if a person in order to direct a system to take action has oversight and rules binding what they may do, then I am generally OK with that system. A network of passive cameras that can be used to track fleeing thugs or stolen cars? Grand. A network of cameras that automatically issues tickets without intervention? Now that pisses me off and I think is a serious misuse of the power granted to the government. The sooner people see the difference the sooner they can push for oversight and reasonable use of the cameras.
Having read David Brin I would argue that any feed from a public camera also be publically accessible. When anyone can watch anyone else, when the police as well as citizens are bothe being recorded in public - then there is equal footing.
Re:Parent post is full of misinformation (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Shooting?? I thought the UK had strict gun cont (Score:4, Interesting)
Care to back the Australia comment up with some meaningful information? And the England one too.