Vehicle GPS data sold to police depts, used for speed traps

Vehicle GPS data sold to police depts, used for speed traps.

[newsimage][/newsimage]More motorists are relying on personal GPS units these days to provide in-vehicle navigation and traffic information. Many do not realize, however, that the unit is not only giving data, but is also recording it and sending it back to the manufacturer.

Read the full article here: [](

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

Clicking link -> “[B]Forbidden[/B]: You don’t have permission to access /404/ on this server.”

No problem here clicking on the link it worked perfectly fine for me :iagree:

I do not use a GPS myself and have no need for one. I just use an old
fashioned road map if it happens that I need to know any directions or
just remember the directions from past trips on the road or I’ll just stop
somewhere and ask for directions like my dad used to do. :bigsmile:

I got the “Forbidden” screen before. Now the page is showing.

It is well believed that speed cameras are usually abused used as revenue generators and this report clearly shows a good example with the police focusing on speeding areas than frequent accident areas, since GPS’ obviously don’t collect accident information.

Another problem with speed cameras is the delay in getting the fine: If someone gets pulled over by the cops for speeding, they are immediately punished and chances are that they’ll be watching their speed more carefully after that. However, if someone gets caught by a speed camera, it could be several days before that person gets the ticket and a higher chance of receiving multiple fines from the same or repositioned speed camera by the time the first fine comes through. Here in Ireland, it can be 2 or more months before the fine comes through in the mail.

In my opinion, rather than focus on speed cameras, the cops should be looking at improving the cameras to look at other types of penalties, such as a front-facing camera that detects if the seat belt is fastened, if the driver is using its mobile hand-held, etc. with suspect images being reviewed by an officer before fines are issued. Even without the technology, simply taking a picture of each passing car and reviewing a random sample of 1000/day would be effective at finding a handful of offenders and make an effective deterrent, much like a cop at the side of the road checking for such offenses. These are the only type of cameras that really should be called “safety cameras”, unlike speed cameras that check speed only.

I think the police should get their noses out of our business. They are far too intrusive already. I would rather be more responsible for myself/family than have them snoop around in my life looking for an opportunity to send a ticket in the mail to pad the government’s coffers. This is just another form of taxation, IMO, and does nothing to make anyone safer.

I am sure this will hit in America soon too but invasion of privacy will be brought up I bet too.


You must be looking forward to the day when a police state runs your country…

Your a scarry (and very ignorant) person, Sean, if you actually want the police department to have that kind of power over us. And unfortunately, there are getting to be way too many people that think like this.

That said, a lot of the electronics (cell phones, GM’s NorthStar, GPS units, the black boxes in our cars, etc,) that people use (somethimes without even being aware of its existance - like the black boxes in cars) track and record where they are, and too many people gladly give up their privacy in exchange for the slight possibility that it may benefit them at some point in their lives. The really bad thing is that the information on those devices can be (and already has been) subpoenad by police departments to be used against the owner in court. For me, I say no thanks to the spy gadgets. I prefer my privacy.

I think you are seeing the difference in general mindset between Europeans and Americans. IMO, the average European is more willing to let government intrude into their lives than the average American. I wouldn’t say Europeans are scary, or ignorant, just more tolerant of government intervention on a personal level.

I don’t know why everyone thinks I’m in support for what the police are doing, as personally I hate the cameras, especially the pairs that measure average speed.

I made the above suggestions to show that the police are focusing too heavily on speed and that if they want to call their cameras “Safety cameras”, they should cover a range of offenses. I am certainly not in support of speed or “safety” cameras and already stated above that they are abused as revenue generators and are not as effective as roads being properly policed.

I think Europeans are more tolerant (full stop), and we certainly have different values.
I think we are more willing to give up some personal privacy if giving up that privacy is for the common good of the whole community.

Example. In our town, like most towns in the UK we have closed circuit cameras. Are they intrusive? Yes of course they are, but crimes such as muggings and robbery in our town is down 96% since they were installed, and I personally feel safe walking home on a nice evening, and not worrying if i’ll be attacked.

Regarding speed cameras and gathering data from GPS on where to target people speeding.
Try shouting out “I demand privacy” so there can be no police snooping on motorists, and try telling that to a mother or father who just lost their only son or daughter to speeding motorist doing 70MPH in a 40MPH zone.

I’m not saying its right to snoop on people, but It’s really all a matter of your perspective.

Exactly my point. It is universally understood that a “conservative” in Europe is not the same as a “conservative” in the USA. Europe has a longer history than the USA and that history regarding government has been fairly repressive in relation the average person for a number of the past centuries. I think that gives Europeans more tolerance of, and reliance on, government. Their benchmark of what is considered “excessive government” is shaped by their history. There are certain laws and regulations you have that would cause a full blown revolution here in the USA. Our Constitution and Bill of Rights are basically documents meant to protect people from their government. The writings of our Founding Fathers confirm this. This is all we have known since the country was founded.

As for your last argument, there are many people that are willing to take care of themselves and don’t want the police intruding in their lives to get what they consider is a marginal amount additionalsecurity. Maybe the police are looked at differently in Europe than the USA. Here, many in the police force have the job because they want to control other people. You can break law enforcement into two camps. The first do it because they want to help people and the second group do it because they love the power that comes with the job. That second group is much larger than I am comfortable with here in the States. Giving law enforcement more and more power doesn’t always result in a decent trade-off between personal freedom and security.

In some counties they already have them and not only do you get a speeding fine.

[QUOTE=Dee;2586715]I think Europeans are more tolerant (full stop), and we certainly have different values.
I think we are more willing to give up some personal privacy if giving up that privacy is for the common good of the whole community.[/quote]

I think Europeans are far too tolerant, because they like the “free stuff” that comes with the sacrifice of giving up personal data. And if the personal data is already out there (phone books, community registers), why would another database harm?

I’m not saying its right to snoop on people, but It’s really all a matter of your perspective.
If people knew what they were planning to do with the data, i guess far less people would tap the “i agree” button. And that’s the main problem: You cannot know what is done with the data, because the stupid license agreements are too complex.