- Joined
- Jul 21, 2007
- Messages
- 11,868
- Reaction score
- 875
Well, welfare recipients should have other stuff on their plates than worrying about being tracked by their plates!
California using license plate readers to track welfare recipients
- Thread starter jefferz
- Start date
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2017
- Messages
- 1,446
- Reaction score
- 0
You can do better than this. I know they can’t all be classics but FFS
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2005
- Messages
- 26,668
- Reaction score
- 8,417
pretty darn shocking, but then again, it's probably 5K for a clearance permit of some sort.
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,542
- Reaction score
- 25,533
They have only acted in 1,100 cases as I read in another article, and it may require some boots-on-the-ground follow-up which will also incur costs. They are tight-lipped about how exactly they are using it to prove welfare fraud, and frankly, I'm 100% okay with that. If they tell us how they use it, the PoS welfare defrauders will learn it, and adapt.
Let the scumbags piece that together one court case at a time. Don't make it as easy as a Google. After all, these people clearly don't have a work ethic, so this strategy should also prove highly successful.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2008
- Messages
- 18,597
- Reaction score
- 1,766
Yeah, I get that going after welfare fraud is going to be a pretty popular cause, but this seems like a huge violation of privacy or at least massive potential for abuse. People who claim to be against big government should be against this kind of technology.
- Joined
- May 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,221
- Reaction score
- 5,821
I worked for the CA state as an investigator of sorts and there was too much of a hassle to get information from other agencies. If I wanted to see someone's state or fed tax returns it would take several signatures and a month to get a folder back. Same thing with the EDD & DMV.
There were already several safegaurds in place preventing frivolous searches, why not make it point and click so an investigator could click a link and see "oh this guy is pulling $1,500 a week (reported to EDD) and claiming to SNAP that he makes $400"
We were tasked with touching 5 cases a day and could have done much more had we had faster access to the data we were already legally allowed to view.
There were already several safegaurds in place preventing frivolous searches, why not make it point and click so an investigator could click a link and see "oh this guy is pulling $1,500 a week (reported to EDD) and claiming to SNAP that he makes $400"
We were tasked with touching 5 cases a day and could have done much more had we had faster access to the data we were already legally allowed to view.
- Joined
- May 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,221
- Reaction score
- 5,821
Also, in before people report article states 37% of welfare is fraud
What was the most egregious case you ever cracked bro?
- Joined
- May 14, 2009
- Messages
- 11,221
- Reaction score
- 5,821
I was not in welfare. I recovered "stolen" sales tax revenue from corporations that went broke and shut down.
When a business collects that 9cents sales tax on your 1$ purchase its supposed to be held "in trust" and given to the state.
Lots of business when faltering will spend it on their employees, rent, lights. Anything to keep the business afloat. Some shut down and just put it in their pockets. But it never belonged to them so I would work to assign personal responsibility to the corporate officers who blew it.
Notice these are corporate tax cheats. If a business was a sole proprietor then it was much much simpler to levy their accounts or garnish wages. If they complied they got a payment plan, if they ignored us or said no we took everything in their accounts. Real estate was off limits, but we would lien it. Boats, airplanes and that 3rd ferrari would be seized and sold.
The worst was probably auto dealers who would sell a 50k car and keep the 5k you just paid in sales tax. Their debts could rack up a million dollars a year. Those cases were well above my pay grade. I recovered like $250k the year I was there.
Note: every state that collects sales tax has this department.
I was wondering how California hating conservatives were going to try and spin this.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2018
- Messages
- 5,022
- Reaction score
- 2
This is a no spin zone. Just the TRUTH
What the moral dilemma you have here. On one hand you have welfare rats getting caught which must produce an instant errection and on the other hand you have California doing gods work. I’m sure if this were Mississippi or Arkanasa it would be a no brainer.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2018
- Messages
- 5,022
- Reaction score
- 2
I don't believe in big govt tracking people wherever they go.
- Joined
- Mar 3, 2014
- Messages
- 57,531
- Reaction score
- 21,614
Take taxis and pay cash.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2012
- Messages
- 30,797
- Reaction score
- 38,091
Definitely gray area, but I feel the 1st amendment, to some degree maybe not quite enough, kept up with technology. 2nd amendment certainly did as only the crazies are touting the "it was meant for muskets!" line. 4th amendment has not had the judicial precedent cases needed to protect against unreasonable searches of data, online life and usage, and other higher technology aspects
I see all of this database information gathering on a person as a search of their person, and with that information out there a person is no longer secure and as thus a warrant should be issued to go after and store that information which is not being done
"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2005
- Messages
- 133,530
- Reaction score
- 32,311
I don't believe that you actually believe that. lol at believing people should just get cash for assistance. Yeah, I can't imagine fraud becoming more common place in that situation. No way would people take advantage and be even less responsible with cash than they would with EBT.
<puh-lease75>
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 32,878
- Reaction score
- 41,945
I think that about 10 years back or so some of the provinces started working with Canada Customs to catch those vacationing in the Caribbean while claiming une,ploy,ent benefits, as these benefits are only payable when you are available to work. Good move!
- Joined
- Jun 13, 2005
- Messages
- 61,542
- Reaction score
- 25,533
The technology exists whether or not government possesses it. Google is tracking everyone's locations in much greater detail than this.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automatic_number-plate_recognition
In the UK apparently they wanted to track stolen vehicles, but IIRC, in the USA, the original reason they started putting the cameras into the stoplights was to track whether or not people were violating traffic laws (running lights or speeding at special-allegation velocities). The increased sophistication of software engines to analyze that data was inevitable. Are you suggesting taking all these cameras down? That would mean a great deal less revenue for the State.
I can see some potential for abuse (ex. government employee uses knowledge of a person having an affair to blackmail them), but I see much greater potential for a public good.
I have been trying to use my imagination, but I'm not doing too well. What are we worried is the greatest potential for government abuse?
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2007
- Messages
- 10,620
- Reaction score
- 3,892
That's a bold statement considering there is nothing in here about the cost to employ every person involved with monitoring this, not to mention the legal costs associated if the state wants to pursue fraudsters. Justice is extremely expensive, and rarely worth the cost to get system abusers. Can't fine them because they won't pay. You can arrest them and jail them but I guarantee you that costs a lot more than their welfare fraud.
