You write, “The objective of the PD is to offset these threats to the community, not to build a database of non-criminal activity,” and “The police are out to protect you, not entrap the innocent.” That is usually true of police departments, and is no doubt true of our current Takoma Park Police Department. But (1) as my examples show, it is not always true, (2) we can’t see the future, and (3) abuses of a TPPD license plate scanner system may not be due to the TPPD if they happen.

I don’t doubt that our police department has good motives, and that there are benefits to the device. My aim was to show there are costs as well, and that motives aren’t enough; we need written procedures that are the product of thinking through every angle of the issue — assuming we’re absolutely sure we have to get the device at all. There are other ways of increasing our safety — hiring more police officers, paying them better to reduce turnover, I don’t know what all else. At any rate, I think our job as citizens is not to simply assume the best of government, but to inform ourselves fully and make sure our rights are protected.

I believe that acquiring this system should not be a done deal; deciding whether to get it — and getting it right if we do — is (or should be) a major undertaking. The City Council (not the police department) should be taking the lead in deciding whether to get it, and if so, what policies should govern its use. Some questions weren’t asked or seemed to get varying answers: does this system address a specific, compelling community need — is there a stolen vehicle crime wave I’m unaware of? Will the system be “on” all the time — a 24/7 fishing expedition — or will it be employed for particular purposes under tight control?