Double Duty Dragnets

A few weeks back, I emphasized that the dragnet the government admitted to using in the Shantia Hassanshahi case (and issued a narrow claim to have shut down) was a drug database. That is, a dragnet purportedly created to track drug trafficking had been used to police sanctions.

Yesterday, the WSJ broke the story revealed by documents liberated by an ACLU FOIA. One point made in both hasn’t received enough emphasis. A 2009 document revealed that asset forfeiture was one of the primary goals of the program.

The Pilot National LPR Initiative has received enormous support from all several government and law enforcement entities and multiple request have been made to connect LPR devices from state and local law enforcement. In anticipation of the Pilot National LPR Initiative being utilized by all of DEA as well as Federal, State, and Local law enforcement throughout the United States, we must insure we can collect, manage, and maintain to the highest standards all data from the system as well as every other aspect of the LPR system. DEA has designed this program to assist with locating, identifying, and seizing bulk currency, guns, and other illicit contraband moving along the southwest border and throughout the United States. With that said, we want to insure we can collect and manage all the data and IT responsibilities that will come with the work to insure the program meets its goals, of which asset forfeiture is primary.

Funny. This passage doesn’t mention drugs at all. On the contrary, this is about seizing things of value — not drugs — so the law enforcement agency can profit.

 

image_print
7 replies
  1. galljdaj says:

    And! To state the obvious, Capitalism has become a byproduct of Our Govt, while the Peoples have been Kicked Off the bus(from the back of the bus).

    • wallace says:

      quote”Just a bit off topic. This does relate to license plate readers, and tracking. Specifically, to the Waze cop-tracking issue (link below) in which the fraidy-cat cops are scared of Waze users keeping real time track of their cop car locations, and want to shut that database down. I think the legal types at Google (they own Waze) should respond in a manner like this:”unquote

      wow. I stand in awe. Yeah, I read this same shit today. What amazes me is there are so many affronts to what should be enough to bring forth a concentrated effort by those who still possess and carry the banner of the 2nd Amendment. However, thanks for sharing more than a casual banter of commentary.

    • wallace says:

      quote”Does anyone in the government have ANY sense of shame left?”unquote

      Yes. You’ll just have to wait for the next whistleblower to demonstrate shame actully exists. Unfortunately, for the ruling class..”shame” has been genetically absent from the cognitive dissonace and core human empathy genes in the genepool of the global elite for over 2000 years. So..I wouldn’t hold my breath that shame will ever bring down a Legal Imperialism State …eveh.

  2. bloopie2 says:

    Just a bit off topic. This does relate to license plate readers, and tracking. Specifically, to the Waze cop-tracking issue (link below) in which the fraidy-cat cops are scared of Waze users keeping real time track of their cop car locations, and want to shut that database down. I think the legal types at Google (they own Waze) should respond in a manner like this:
    *
    Dear Chief of Police So-and-So:
    *
    I understand that you are upset about the fact that technology can now be used to track the locations of certain people and/or vehicles, by placing publicly available location information, in real time, into a database (which in our case is publicly available, but in yours is not). Specifically, it seems that you don’t want us to know where you, the cops, are, when you’re not sucking down donuts. And I understand that you are calling on us (Google), as the representatives of the people (Wave users), to shut this down.
    *
    But, you know, think about that for a minute. After all, you work for us (the people), right? And so, we can tell you what we want you to do to help keep us safe, and we can also tell you what we do not want you to do in order to help keep us safe. In America, you (the police, the government) are allowed to do only that which we tell you you can do — right? You do agree that is our basic concept of governance, don’t you? In contrast, we (the people) can do whatever we want to do, unless we as a community get together and decide (by passing a law) that individual community members should not be able to do something. Correct me if I’m wrong, but I’m not aware that we the people have, so far, gotten together and decided that we are not allowed to keep ourselves (collectively) informed as to where you are at any given time WHEN YOU ARE ON WORKING HOURS DOING THE JOB WE HIRED YOU TO DO AND FOR WHICH WE ARE PAYING YOU AND FROM WHICH JOB WE CAN FIRE YOU.
    *
    In contrast, we (the people) have already passed a law (the Fourth Amendment) that controls and limits how you can keep track of us. You are following that law, aren’t you? You do believe it’s a good thing, don’t you?
    *
    Or do you believe it is a legitimate law enforcement interest to keep track of innocent people’s whereabouts, at all times, in case you need to go back and look at them later should a future crime be committed? If that’s so, then we need to have a serious discussion about that issue. When are you available to meet? We’ll have a public debate, broadcast it live, and save it to the Internet in perpetuity, recording your statements as well as ours. Okay? (That’s an order, not a request, by the way – you do work for us. Show up.)
    *
    And then there’s that argument some are making, that we citizens are afraid of you cops and so that’s why we are doing this thing of keeping track of you. Tell me, sir: Do you think that we are afraid of you? Do you think that we are afraid that if we walk on the street, not the sidewalk, we will end up dead? Do you think that we are afraid that if we sell unlicensed cigarettes, we will wind up dead? Do you think that we are afraid that if we do even something as simple as driving with expired license plates we will need to stop immediately, have our car towed, find a ride home, find a ride to the DMV to get the plates renewed, and pay huge fines to you because of that horrible, terrifying act we committed of driving an unregistered car on the street, an act that clearly made America much less safe and from which you saved (thank You, thank God!) our fellow citizens? Do you think we have any justifiable reason to be afraid of you?
    *
    Do you think that maybe we are doing this so that we can avoid you, so that we don’t get hurt any more by you?
    *
    Please reply. Seriously, we demand to know why you think we are doing this, so we can know what is your attitude toward the people you are supposed to protect and serve. And if you have the wrong attitude, well, then, we’re going to try to fire you.
    *
    In summary, Chief, I note that there are no laws prohibiting what we are doing with Waze, and that there are, in fact, laws prohibiting what you are doing with license plate readers. But perhaps you needn’t worry about your future in this regard: As Tom said to Betty at the end of “Heaven Can Wait”, “There’s nothing to be afraid of.” If you’ve done nothing wrong, Mr. Policeman, then you have nothing to hide.
    +
    Best regards,
    *
    Those damned lawyers from Google
    *
    http://www.dailytech.com/LAPD+Chief+Claims+Googles+Waze+Helps+CopKillers+Pushes+for+Changes+or+Ban/article37104c.htm

  3. wallace says:

    quote:”Funny. This passage doesn’t mention drugs at all. On the contrary, this is about seizing things of value — not drugs — so the law enforcement agency can profit.”unquote

    Funny, this reminds me of driving through Mexico, circa 1954. Legal theives. Too bad the US Child Support system hasn’t been exposed yet. The county CS DA’s makes this blatant theivery look like small time mexican bandits with badges. I know from first hand experience. I just wish I had this guy for my attorney…

Comments are closed.