[CSMastermind]

It sounds frankly dystopian, and I hope that this never comes to my country.

The government has no business tracking the movements of its citizens outside of an active criminal investigation and only then within well defined paramaters.

[afavour]

It does feel like a very stereotypically American view to be absolutely aghast at the idea of the government tracking the location of cars while being entirely permissive of private companies doing the same and reselling that data to anyone and everyone that wants it (including the government, ironically)

[akira2501]

Disabling government technology is a crime. Interfering with third party data collection efforts is my absolute right. These are not the same things.

[nixgeek]

In most (if not all?) parts of the US you are legally required to display a license plate and to not obscure it — those tinted covers you see people use are both a “Pull me over if you’re not otherwise busy!” to a lot of State Troopers (at least according to those that I occasionally shoot with on a pistol range), and ineffective outside nighttime (they reflect the IR emitter, but those often aren’t on in daylight).

So, how are you “interfering with third party data collection efforts”, while also meeting your legal requirements (government) obligations to display an unobscured and valid license plate on the vehicle, given the conversation is about ALPR/ANPR and where the tracking is a camera which reads the license plate?

[silverquiet]

That doesn't really sound like a right and if it is you probably signed it away when you bought the car.

[Mountain_Skies]

And that company is free to fight that battle in civil court whereas the government will haul you into criminal court. Pretty big difference.

[CSMastermind]

I'm not cool with private companies tracking my location either, outside of specific scenarios where I've given express permission.

This country absolutely needs stronger consumer protections.