Surveillance Is Good Because I Want Drivers I Don’t Like To Be Punished: Cleveland Columnist

from the giving-up-rights-for-vengeance dept

Here it is: the dumbest defense of automatic license plate readers I’ve ever read. While we can subtract some points because the person writing it has no power to install/un-install/cover in garbage bags surveillance tech, he’s a regular contributor to a long-running newspaper in a major city. And since this paper is still willing to give him a byline and inches (or digital equivalent), he’s not going to get a pass.

This would be the work of Ted Diadiun, who at least appears to be the MAGA ideal of a centrist. (This means he occasionally criticizes Trump but also gets big mad when people suggest this nation might be better off if Trump was dead.)

I don’t expect everyone — even those with newspaper staff credentials — to get into the weeds when it comes to surveillance tech. On the other hand, I fully expect them to present a better argument in favor of ALPR systems than “Man, I wish the cops were pulling over every driver I think they should be pulling over.”

And, yet, this is Ted Diadiun’s opening argument:

How many of us have witnessed an idiotic driver and muttered, “Why is there never a cop around when you need one?”

That is why – getting to the point – I’m a big fan of surveillance cameras. Speed cameras, red-light cameras, Flock cameras … all of them.

They’re always around, even when a cop isn’t. And they give me some assurance that people who think laws are for others will get what’s coming to them. And those, like me and my friend, who think that scofflaws are increasing exponentially, can cling to the hope that the number will come down if people know or suspect they’re on camera.

Bro, I hear you. I share the road (and see it not equally shared) with assholes. I do wish vengeance upon them. But I also would rather keep my rights than give them up in exchange for traffic enforcement that subjectively pleases me.

I’m on the other side. And that would be the other side that Ted feels is too stupid, too soft on crime, or otherwise misinformed.

Not everyone, unfortunately, thinks that way.

How can you tell you’re the greatest? Well, it’s when you present your side (me and my friend think “idiotic” drivers need more punishment) and follow it up with a statement that says anyone opposed to your subjective views on traffic enforcement are “unfortunately” wrong.

Ted Diadiun is upset because city leaders are trying to do their best to serve their constituents. Many are opposed to the ALPR system imposed on them. This system belongs to Flock, which has become a surveillance tech front runner — one that has often greeted legitimate criticism with “go fuck yourself” vibes.

Immediately after invoking the unholy name of Flock, Diadiun says a number of things very quickly. First, he admits ALPRs won’t do anything to punish the speeders and scofflaws that so incensed him and his neighbor. Then he says something even Flock itself might not want him to say:

These cameras do not identify speeders or people who bust through red lights – there are other devices for that. What they do is capture the license numbers of every vehicle that drives by. Their gaze can also capture other things, such as porch pirates and car thieves and vandals and other dregs of society lurking in our neighborhoods.

Wow, Ted, wow. These ALPRs are great because… they do so much more than collect the plate/location records the public assumed AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READERS (ALPRs) would be limited to doing.

But you’re fine with surveillance, surveillance creep, and giving the finger to your fellow Cleveland residents because?

There are more than 1,700 of these devices scattered around Cuyahoga County, but at current issue are 100 Flock cameras in Cleveland. Mayor Justin Bibb, who correctly understands their value, has tried to renew the city’s contract with the company, but has been beset by objections from, among others, a raucous group called “Flock No.” As a result, he tossed the decision to Cleveland City Council. Flock No members disrupted a recent council meeting with clapping and chanting, but there’s been no decision as yet.

That organization has also taken on the Cleveland Metropolitan School District, which has 200 Flock cameras outside its buildings in an effort to help police solve cases of car break-ins, vandalism, street takeovers in parking lots and sex offenders illegally visiting school property.

Hmmm. The citizens protested a council meeting. The mayor punted. And while Flock may have installed 200 cameras in the school district, naming the things Flock claims it cameras will prevent isn’t even in the same galaxy as naming the things Flock’s cameras have actually prevented. Why, I could claim my use of the letter “e” in this post has been done to prevent sex offenders from being appointed by the Trump administration. And it would be every bit as credible as claiming a couple hundred cameras are “helping” police do everything from investigating petty theft (they don’t care) or keeping sex offenders off school property (citation PLEASE).

And then Diadiun goes on to both (1) make it clear Flock’s cameras aren’t limited to license plate readings and (2) pretend fighting for rights is just advocacy for criminals.

The American Civil Liberties Union, which can always be counted on to throw roadblocks in front of efforts to stop crime and capture criminals, of course has weighed in on the anti-camera side, charging that it amounts to mass spying that turns its plate-reading into surveillance cameras, and that its recordings of bumper stickers amount to an invasion of privacy.

(Ironically, it was the photos of bumper stickers on a Chevrolet Camaro captured by Flock cameras that allowed federal agents to capture and arrest an armed robber who had held up ten local stores at gunpoint in 2021, as chronicled in a Thursday story on cleveland.com. Guess the ACLU would have preferred that the guy remain free to continue to terrify and perhaps harm additional clerks and customers.)

If the first paragraph doesn’t make you want to punch the columnist in the face, read it again. This is not what the ACLU does. It’s not there to protect criminals. It’s there to protect rights. Rights apply to everyone, even (alleged) criminals. Ted is here to declare he’d rather see a thousand innocent people jailed than allow a single criminal to go free.

Then he goes on to (unhelpfully — in the case of Flock) note that Flock captures more than plate images and allows law enforcement to run searches on things that aren’t normally considered to be part of day-to-day ALPR business… like bumper stickers.

And, again, Diadiun closes out the paragraph by pretending the ACLU’s intervention in this case was in the interest of increasing crime, rather than forcing the government to respect constitutional rights.

Having already demonstrated he’s a facile dolt, Ted Diadiun wraps things up by ensuring there can be no debate about his (barely) “useful idiot” status:

Unless you have something to hide, why would you object to cameras that record license plates and other information?

Please post your location history data publicly, Ted. You have nothing to hide. Let’s see where you’ve been and who you’ve associated with. Just dump it out in a future column so we can sift through like the cops you love so much. Until you’re willing to that much, please shut the fuck up about location tracking, ALPRs, civil liberties, and drivers who will now feel increasingly justified in their attempts to run you off the road.

[I have reached out to Ted Diadiun to see if he’ll provide readers with location data collected by his phone and/or other services since he’s apparently has nothing to hide. I’ve also asked him to explain why it’s okay for the government to have this information by default, if he’s unwilling to share it with his readers. I will update this post in the unlikely event that Ted chooses to respond to my inquiries.]

Filed Under: 4th amendment, aclu, alpr, location tracking, surveillance, ted diadiun, traffic cameras

Companies: cleveland.com, flock safety