This is part of our Cardinal Way project on promoting civil discussions.
The use of surveillance technology is growing across Virginia. As part of our ongoing coverage of that topic (see “State of Surveillance: Everyone’s watching”), Cardinal News executive editor Jeff Schwaner recently drove 300 miles across the western part of the state and then asked law enforcement agencies to send him whatever surveillance footage they captured of his vehicle.
Some did; some did not. The city of Roanoke and the Botetourt County sheriff went to court to block the release of information; that case is still pending.
With Schwaner’s account of his attempt to obtain surveillance photos of his own vehicle taken on public highways, we included a questionnaire where we posed a series of questions for readers to answer. Last week, we published some responses to the question: Should government be able to perform warrantless public surveillance and withhold footage they capture of you from you? Why or why not? Today, here are some of the responses to the question: How can our most basic privacy rights be protected when government is filming us in public even if we’re not under investigation?
* * *
IMO, there is no expectation of privacy when traveling on public roads.
Hunsdon Cary III, Lynchburg
For better or worse; SCOTUS has determined there is no expectation of privacy in public.
Leslie Trivette, Quinton, New Kent County
There is no protection against the government when they have all been compromised.
Travis Bohny, Radford
Stay home if you think you are private in public. If you are assaulted, a victim of road rage or your daughter kidnapped for human trafficking you would be thankful for everyone of those cameras.
Martha Dodd-Slippy, Emporia
You are being filmed almost every moment of your life these days. The real question is why are you so concerned about law enforcement having your data. This implies you have a massive mistrust in law enforcement or you are hiding something
Steve Robinson, Churchville
People should focus on lobbying local/state government as DC is too far removed. Masses will have to refuse to comply by purchasing covers for their license plates to be used when cameras are near (the locations are being mapped open source at deflock.me) and work on creating or using current tech that disrupts facial recognition (and maybe gait recognition) technology to help. There’s no quick answer but thanks for raising awareness.
Hawes Coleman, Staunton
By legislative act and perhaps constitutional amendment. The courts have already ruled that outside of our homes we have little to no expectation of privacy. I believe legislators should restore and protect individual rights to privacy. On the other hand, examination of public surveillance footage in specific criminal investigations has led directly to the apprehension of perpetrators. I’m thinking specifically of the two separate then unsolved murders in Charlottesville several years ago committed by Jesse Matthew who was first identified following one of the murdered women on the Downtown Mall on surveillance footage.
Robert R. Bollinger, Richmond
Most people who watch any sort of TV show about law enforcement know the criticality of being able to retrace a person’s actions on camera (Great Britain and Europe seem to have way more surveillance than we have) in helping solve crimes. I think the positive aspect of surveillance is more beneficial than my loss of privacy (which in a public place seems less important than in my private home).
Elizabeth Kelley, Fredericksburg
You can be filmed in public any time or place by all sorts of video or photographic cameras.
Wally Bunker, Culpeper
No, and I couldn’t care less if it was used. Great tool to apprehend criminals & solve crimes.
William Howard, Lebanon
Lawsuits!
Rick Galliher, Reston
By having safeguards and written state statutes/code limiting the dissemination of the information. The information could work to your benefit also if you were a victim.
Robbie Bridges, Goochland County
They can’t. The inherent potential evil when humans are in power (LEO power to politicians) means things can be done behind out backs regardless of what you are told.
Mark Matthews, Chatham
One should not have the same expectation of privacy in public. There are private companies tracking shipping and profiting from the data. There should be some guardrails on access to the data but the expectation of privacy is not guaranteed in public.
Charleen McManus, Richmond
I believe that we have given up our most basic privacy rights by relying on surveillance and cameras and timelines on our phone and watches that keep track of where you walk and how many miles you drive. I will say this, there are highway cameras that is part of the 511 system you can download at Apple to your phone where you can watch the 511 surveillance cameras that are traffic cameras is what they’re called. And I do know people that expect their husbands or wives to be going through a location at a certain time because that’s what they said they were doing and they will watch the camera to see if they see their vehicle. Trust is gone in each other and in our government. We should be prepared, no, we should expect to be under surveillance 24 hours a day,
Stacy Anderson Eagle, Appomattox
This is the most relevant question. When is ‘public’ no longer public and what constitutes private activities? If another person could legally witness a particular activity or event and provide details or affirmation of said event, why would recorded images be any different? This does bring into focus a question about our societal tolerance of everyday indiscretions and moral lapses. I think there is a big difference between ‘Big Brother’ watching out for the greater safety of a society and a ‘Nanny State’ that is wagging its finger at someone for picking their nose in public. This creates another bureaucratic dilemma. No law or regulation has ever allowed for anything to be interpreted beyond some limited set of ‘reasonable’ and ‘valid’ circumstances. Those (law makers) who determine reasonable and valid for an individual location or particular time period will come and go. So will those interpretations.
Jeff Lotts, Danville
They have taken all privacy rights. Welcome to the Communist States of America
Phillip Whipple, Christiansburg
