A new way to find hot cars
North Charleston police: PlateScan sends clear message
AP
Video
PlateScan
North Charleston officer Pfc. Victor Buskirk gives a demonstration of the PlateScan, a new system that allows police to photograph license plates and check them against national criminal databases.
North Charleston police are using new technology that promises to bring them closer to one of law enforcement's Holy Grails: an all-seeing eye.
A patrol car outfitted with three special cameras can photograph hundreds of licenses plates per hour and look them up in a national database. An officer cruising a parking lot or a freeway can, within a few short minutes, check whether scores of cars are stolen. It also alerts the officer if the vehicle belongs to a wanted criminal, registered sex offender or someone with a restraining order.
It's so useful that it's addictive, according to one patrolman. Pfc. Victor Buskirk said he's tempted to take detours through parking lots, even during time off, to see what he can find.
"Criminals like hotels — they can pay in cash, they have that anonymity," Buskirk said while demonstrating the plate-scanner near Montague Avenue. "But if they have a vehicle, it'll tell on them."
Before, officers had to call in every tag number over the radio. During an eight-hour shift, they might scan 100 plates. Now they can scan 2,500 or more.
Within a few weeks, North Charleston had recovered two stolen cars, an overdue rental car and a stolen plate. They keep a permanent record so they can check later where a particular car was seen. That database recently surpassed 24,000 scans.
Police chief Jon Zumalt hopes the plate-scanner will send a signal: "Don't come to North Charleston with a stolen car. Don't steal cars in our city.
"This is terrific technology that helps us better police and provide safety to our citizenry," Zumalt said during a recent interview. "The message is: Criminals are getting smarter; so are the cops."
The city put $24,000 in this year's budget for the system after City Councilman Bobby Jameson pushed for it, according to the chief. North Charleston police said they were the first agency in the state to buy it, though Georgetown police are testing it as well.
PlateScan of Newport Beach, Calif., makes the equipment, which is a kind of Automated License Plate Recognition system, or ALPR. The roof-mounted cameras take pictures of plates and overview shots of the vehicles they belong to. Software picks out series of numbers and letters from the landscape.
One of PlateScan's co-founders, Bob Pinzler, said about 70 police agencies around the country use it, most of them in California and Texas. Two companies offer competing products.
"The driving force behind it was the search for stolen vehicles," Pinzler said.
Relatively new in the United States, the technology originated in the United Kingdom in the 1990s for entirely different reasons, Pinzler said. It was designed to help British authorities track down cars used by bombers from the Irish Republican Army.
New police techniques often give rise to legal problems, and PlateScan is no exception. The American Civil Liberties Union has objected to storing scanned information, according to news reports in other parts of the country. The ACLU's national office in New York did not have anyone available to comment last week, and its Columbia office did not return calls.
Miller Shealy, however, doesn't foresee PlateScan giving rise to privacy concerns.
"It's just like the cameras that are on the bridge or the other devices that read your speed," said Shealy, a former state and federal prosecutor and assistant professor at the Charleston School of Law. "It's all publicly observable."
He said equipment that merely enhances the five senses poses no problems under the Fourth Amendment, which safeguards citizens against unlawful searches and seizures.
Sgt. Todd Morgan, North Charleston police's technology supervisor, said, "There's really no expectation of privacy out on the road.
"If my car were stolen and if there was a tool out there that would find my car," he said, "I would want it."
Reach Noah Haglund at 937-5550 or nhaglund@postand courier.com.
E-mail this story
Printer-friendly version
Comments
geekguy2008 (anonymous) says...
The cruiser you see in the construction site all night is probably an officer who is working an off-duty security detail. Meaning, they are getting paid by the construction company to sit there all night and make sure some ya-hoos don't come by to steal the air compressors, utility trailers or other stuff.
May 12, 2008 at 1:31 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
carolinadude (anonymous) says...
Good morning all/tripsa,
It is more intrusive but necessary in my opinion to use available technology. I want local law enforecement to know who's out there in our neighborhoods in view of the open border crisis that has in fact become an invasion from the south. Now "the good guys" will know who and where they are and where they're "hanging out". If and when we get the SC General Assembly to enact "immigration reform", local law enforcement will then be able to coordinate this data and work with ICE to enforce immigration law. I believe this scanning technology can be used to greatly enhance the security of our citizens.
May 12, 2008 at 8:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UrGatorbait (anonymous) says...
Great more intrusiveness. Now if the law can keep up with the technology but it won't. It keeps giving those in power more control over the average citizen. We keep creeping towards a police state and for that I'll probably be dubbed a cop hater. Oh well.
I disagree it's not like the cameras on the bridge, they are used to monitor the flow of traffic to help report on traffic congestion not scan your plate numbers. Enhance the five senses? Please. The drivel they try to justify and sell this stuff with.
Taxpayer purchased police vehicle used by off duty officer for private gain. Oh I see nothing wrong with that (Sure) but the subject is the license plate scanners.
May 12, 2008 at 8:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
jammanofdi (anonymous) says...
Big brother is watching you! My question is, how long until this same technology gives cops even more information about the vehicle and driver. It'd be willing to bet that even right now, armed with this information, cops can be fed more than they're admitting to in this article. I bet that they can just as easily pull criminal reports, credit reports, driving records - whatever they want background wise - based on a license plate number.
May 12, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
And I would be three for Early's idea.
As for this plate tech, useful but I'm sure can be developed to perform the same amount of bad as is good.
May 12, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
CountryGirl (anonymous) says...
The technology is only as good as the person using it. A lot of good cops out there, but it only takes one rotten one to mess up a good thing. What about all the paper tags on cars? We have some people in our neighborhood that have had three cars towed because they were stolen or used in a crime. I heard they bought them at auction??? They always have cars in their driveway with paper tags on them.
AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH THIS P&C RE-SETTING...IT TOOK ME FOREVER TO READ THE POSTS BECAUSE IT KEPT RE-CHARGING OR SOMETHING.
May 12, 2008 at 10:15 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
PalmettoDP (anonymous) says...
I'm fine with this scanner being used as it is now - to find stolen vehicles. But I'm afraid it's just a matter of time before they become "greed cameras" - scanning plates and mailing traffic tickets. If you're falsely accused, you have to take a day off of work to fight the ticket. Don't get me wrong, I think traffic laws ought be reasonably enforced - but not with these cameras.
May 12, 2008 at 10:16 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
sbs920 (anonymous) says...
hey! just think! Next it will be ROBO-COP !
I can't wait. . .
Just imagine the videos of police brutality. . . LOL!
Can't play the race on the ROBO !
What was that 4th Objective again now. . .
May 12, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
PalmettoDP (anonymous) says...
I should clarify - I'm fine with them using the scanners to check for stolen vehicles - as long as a police officer personally checks each "hit" to verify it is accurate. I would be against a fully automated system because of the risk of false accusations.
May 12, 2008 at 10:35 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
blondjes (anonymous) says...
tripsa: your comparing this to the holocaust????? if some low life thief stole your car and the cops found it using this system you wouldn't be complaining one bit, i'm glad they are actually out their looking for these guys, their are tons of people who never see their car again! we are paying cops with our taxes and you complaining about them actually doing their job? you must not have a lot to worry about in your life if your so concerned about this!
May 12, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
suec (anonymous) says...
some of you people suffer from ATC- Addiction To Complaining
May 12, 2008 at 11:04 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
I don't have a problem with this either...as long as some cop doesn't knock on my door and try to arrest me for not paying taxes or some bs. Yeah. I sure did pay them. Big chunk out of my wallet.
May 12, 2008 at 11:27 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
mosinfan (anonymous) says...
Tripsa, good points...
May 12, 2008 at 12:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
theronce (anonymous) says...
Hang this auto-refresh.
May 12, 2008 at 12:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
suec (anonymous) says...
tripsa,
"And if some low-life stole my car, it is probably my fault for not taking the proper precautions"
So if someone steals my car, it is my fault, not the theifs?
That one sentence pretty much sums up why we have so much crime. People who steal think it is ok beacuse after all...the owner should have had a security system or live in a gated community.
When a thief steals, it is the thief that is doing wrong, not the victim. It doesn't matter if I left the car running with the doors unlocked. It may be a stupid thing to do, but it does not give someone the right to steal my car.
May 12, 2008 at 12:33 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
suec (anonymous) says...
No I would not, but even if I did, it is the thief who did wrong, not me.
I don't agree with the law about leaving your car running un-attended, especially if it is on my own property.
Should I also be fined for sleeping with my windows open? How about if I go to the store and don't have pepper spray in hand as i walk to my car?
May 12, 2008 at 1:13 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
brittany0315 (anonymous) says...
Posted by Early on May 12, 2008 at 9:11 a.m.
"I think if they start shooting everyone wearing a hooded sweatshirt...and baggy pants around their knees this would solve the crime problem much faster."
The majority of people who wear hoodies and baggy pants are young black men. What are you really trying to say here?
May 12, 2008 at 1:20 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
Brittany, don't read into it. I just KNEW someone would post something about race here...especially after that comment. Notice how Early said EVERYONE in that statement too. Since when does everyone mean "young black men?" Besides, if you want to take it as racial, your post is just as bad if not worse than Early's because all you're trying to do is stir up some crap.
May 12, 2008 at 1:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
JohnS (anonymous) says...
This is nothing new. They were using this in London five years ago. The London Met police can even scan your face from a security camera against known wanted people in their database. The lic plate scan is how they track unpaid ticket offenders and for other reasons like stolen cars.
May 12, 2008 at 1:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
They "found" my stolen car alright. They found it smoldering in a field. Oh, the perp was (dare I say it) a black man.
May 12, 2008 at 1:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UrGatorbait (anonymous) says...
Wow alot of people that are very quick to give up their right to privacy for that myth called protection. They trust the government implicitly and have no problems forking over their freedoms that others earned for them.
Personal responsibility to protect themselves and their fellow citizens from crime? What a concept that is obviously lost on some of you.
Those that give up freedom for security deserve neither. Ben Franklin was right. You don't want to take responsibility for you own safety but have no problem at all turning all your security needs over to the police/government so they can decide, not you, what you should and shouldn't be protected from. What a bunch of lemmings.
May 12, 2008 at 1:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Slick50 (anonymous) says...
I wonder if it will alert the police to EXPIRED TAGS as well.
May 12, 2008 at 1:59 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
haha yeah I guess when the year is an obvious prior one it's just too difficult for a cop to tell.
May 12, 2008 at 2:03 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
UrGatorbait (anonymous) says...
Weeeee now that is just plain mean..hahaha
May 12, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Weeeee (anonymous) says...
Along with something like this, SC should re-introduce vehicle inspection. There's something definitely wrong when you've seen a car without a driver's side door driving around town.
May 12, 2008 at 2:24 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
suec (anonymous) says...
Gatorbait,
What freedom are we forking over? The freedom to steal a car and not get caught?
May 12, 2008 at 2:32 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
ForPnC (anonymous) says...
Great tool for the police to have but I see it be thoroughly abused by big brother in the immediate future.
Do I have anything to hide? Nope. But my business is MINE. NOT YOURS.
May 12, 2008 at 3:04 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
brittany0315 (anonymous) says...
It's not about race Weeeee. It's about the stereotype that Harpo was refer. Baggy pant wearing folks are criminals and white shirts and khaki pants wearing folks are not? I said the MAJORITY of people who wear baggy pants are black men and nowhere did I say that was everyone. I wasn't pulling the race card, but simply pointing out that an unfair statement was made. And if I misunderstood Harpo's statement, that's why I asked for clarification.
May 12, 2008 at 3:23 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
whome (anonymous) says...
"It's so useful that it's addictive, according to one patrolman. Pfc. Victor Buskirk said he's tempted to take detours through parking lots, even during time off, to see what he can find."
==========================================================
Something tells me that this type of search may be illegal. While the Supreme Court tends to find little Fourth Amendment expectations of privacy in the automobile, a search of private parking lots might be a little too intrusive. Of course, the analysis would depend on whether the plate was visible from the road, etc.
May 12, 2008 at 6:34 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
DontSpamMeBro (anonymous) says...
This type of activity is NOT illegal, unconstitutional, or any other ill- or un- type of activity conspiracy theorists might associate with it. It is simply using a machine to view what is easily and openly viewable by anyone on the road.
May 12, 2008 at 7:44 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
suec (anonymous) says...
Amen Harpo!
I say do what ever it takes to give the good guys an advantage over the bad guys.
Phone tapping, profiling, metal detectors...if it stops the criminals and keeps my family and other innocent peopel safe then I am all for it.
May 12, 2008 at 9:47 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Postandcourier.com is pleased to offer readers the enhanced ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Postandcourier.com does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not postandcourier.com. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "report abuse" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website.
Users can now build user-to-user connections, follow friends' recent posts, add an avatar that fits their personality, and more. If you have posted here before you'll need to sign up again, or if you've never posted before, start now by signing up!
Full terms and conditions can be read here.