Cannabis News Protecting Patients Access to Medical Marijuana
  New Police Technology Must Be Carefully Used
Posted by FoM on July 13, 2001 at 17:43:02 PT
Editorial 
Source: Tribune Chronicle 

justice The U.S. Supreme Court recently put the brakes on police departments seeking to use heat sensing cameras to detect marijuana plants growing inside someone's house. The court said police must have a search warrant before they can use technology that lets them see what is going on inside a person's home. But new technology is spurring all sorts of government initiatives to keep track of people.

-- About 60 communities now use cameras to catch people running red lights. As more equipment becomes available, more want to sign on, including some in Trumbull County.

-- The National Park Service is testing a program that uses a combination of radar and cameras to catch speeders on park roads.

-- Tampa recently became the first city to use cameras linked to face-recognition software to scan city streets in an effort to find criminals.

In theory, this sounds good. Advocates of these programs say the tougher enforcement improves public safety. Constant surveillance from a camera cuts down on people running red lights and forces speeders to slow down.

But the price in terms of lost privacy is very, very steep. The prospect of government constantly watching law-abiding citizens has turned the liberal American Civil Liberties Union and conservative House Majority Leader Dick Armey, R-Texas, into allies on this issue.

There are many problems with this use of cameras.

First and foremost is the assault on privacy. Armey said it clearly: ''Placing police officers in a remote control booth to watch the every move of honest citizens isn't going to make us safer.'' Innocent people should not be subject to such constant monitoring by the government. Before citizens are subjected to such surveillance, police should have probable cause and a warrant.

Second is the great potential for abuse. Visionics Corp., which makes the camera system used in Tampa, says there is a code of conduct for police using their equipment. The computer database should not store images of innocent people, and only the faces of known criminals should be entered into the face-recognition software.

But who is going to enforce that code?

Before other cities adopt this technology, there must be strict guidelines on its use that are enforced by outside agencies. For example, in Ohio the Bureau of Criminal Identification and Information monitors how local police departments use software for using license plates to find the owner of a vehicle. Otherwise, corrupt police or government officials could use this software to harass people or track their every move. Don't think it can't happen. Trumbull County has seen several instances of police officers misusing the license plate program.

There is another potential form of abuse. According to Armey, cities with red-light cameras shortened yellow lights to increase the number of red-light violations. That results in more tickets and more revenue for the city and the company providing the camera, which gets a share of each fine.

Third, these cameras presume a person is guilty. In the case of traffic radar, a camera does not always clearly show who is driving, so the registered owner always gets the ticket. If the owner was not in the car at the time, he or she must then submit an affidavit claiming his or her innocence. That is backward. Virginia Gov. James S. Gilmore said, ''The use of cameras operating without human judgment reduces our system of justice to trial by machinery without the presumption of innocence.''

Finally there is the potential for mistakes. For instance, in San Diego, attorneys found that sensors in the pavement had been moved, resulting in false readings. How many people can afford the attorney fees needed to fight a ticket and make such a discovery?

And if the use of cameras and radar are not bad enough, technology tracking gets worse. A car rental company in Connecticut has been using satellites to track its customers to see if they were speeding. When a customer went too fast, the company automatically imposed an extra charge on his or her credit card. That scheme ran afoul of consumer protection laws, but the company is amending its notification so it can resume the practice.

If Americans are not careful, this new technology could open the door for Big Brother. People have less a right to privacy when they are in public, but that should not mean police are allowed to watch or track everyone all of the time.

Source: Tribune Chronicle (OH)
Published: Sunday, July 8, 2001
Copyright: 2001 Tribune Chronicle
Contact: editor@tribune-chronicle.com
Website: http://www.tribune-chronicle.com/

Related Articles:

Tampa Uses New Face Scan Technology
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10295.shtml

High-Tech Devices Require a Warrant
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10026.shtml

Court Limits Police's High-Tech Search of Homes
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread10023.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #6 posted by jam_session on July 16, 2001 at 20:55:39 PT:

illegal use of technology by police
I know that police are misusing this type of technology, and they use it to spy on people, to line their own pockets, they watch your children like perverts. They are like a gang in and of themselves. Their excuse for such use of this kind of technology is called the "The War on Drugs"
It is nothing more than a civil war instigated by "Law Enforcement Agencies" federal state and local. Sometimes acting indepentently, but when your read about a "Multijurisdictional Task Force" that means that federal and state law enforcement need local approval before they can participate in enforcement of state laws. Idaho code states that no outside law enforcement agents can legally enforce Idaho laws, as a matter of fact only the sherrif of each county in america has the right to enforce state and local law. I have been following police coruption for some time now, and the tactics they use are unconstitutional.
Question; Why are law enforcement engaged in the manufacturing, sale and distribution of meth and other so called controlled substinces?
Also; Why do they use drugs, sell drugs, and then turn around and arrest people who use and sell drugs?
Last bit of common cents knowledge is that digital technology has made all surveillance, audio and video unreliable as evidence in a court of law. Because of the ease in which digital recordings can be manipulated.
Thats my imput I am a patriotic American willing to expose police corruption.


[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #5 posted by Dsd on July 16, 2001 at 07:07:18 PT
I will not stand for this
I may not be alone on this.. but I will rather go to jail then to have cameras eyeing me all the time in public. If this crap comes here, I will physically destroy them (cameras). Just like my ancestors fought for this great land 200+ years ago. A police state in my lifetime. It is my given right as a citezen to stand up against this sort of tyranny. Lets see them take away out right to bear arms now. I have read that book "1984" and it is too close to reality to mess around with. At no time does it state in the constitution that we have the right to vote against tyranny. Acts of treason by our own government will not go unpunished. Either they win or we win. Rome is inevitable.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #4 posted by dddd on July 14, 2001 at 08:22:12 PT
article
http://www.newsday.com/ap/text/topnews/ap365.htm

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on July 14, 2001 at 08:06:07 PT:

'Quis custodiet ipsos custodes'?
Translation: Who shall guard the guardians?

One of the oldest questions ever posed. And there's still no easy answers. Only now, technology has forced the issue.

"Visionics Corp., which makes the camera system used in Tampa, says there is a code of conduct (emphasis mine) for police using their equipment. The computer database should not store images of innocent people, and only the faces of known criminals should be entered into the face-recognition software. But who is going to enforce that code?

Who indeed? The police?

There are excellent reasons why most police departments have Internal Affairs divisions. Not a day goes by in this country without at least one incident of police corruption making it to the media. And the bigger the city, the greater the opportunities for abuse of police powers - and the concommittant abuse of your rights. The best example of this to date is the Rampart Scandal.

You shouldn't be too worried about Big Brother's expected arrival; the b*****d is already here. He flies around in helicopters at night spcifically looking for grow room thermal output. He brings slobbering, barely controlled 'drug' dogs into our children's schools...when he's not trying to turn them into little snitches on you with his DARE program. He tries to trick you out of your 4th Amemndment rights against unwarranted search and seizures with intimidation and lies. He enters your home when you tell him not to, and later lies in testimony telling a sympathetic judge that you allowed him access.

And he kills children in drug raids on the wrong house, and doesn't pay the same price you or I would if we murdered our neighbors in the same fashion.

Big Brother is already here. But he doesn't have total control over everything yet;your best defense is to know your rights.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #2 posted by jacksplace58 on July 14, 2001 at 04:36:18 PT
big brother
Sobig Brother didn't take over in 1984, It looks like he will by 2004.
Whats a couple of years one way or the other.


[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #1 posted by The GCW on July 13, 2001 at 21:14:59 PT
Perfect
None of us are perfect and so we all are doomed, since there is an over Zealous over regulated over populated bunch looking to help somebody. Every one of us is guilty of something. Given enough time, those whom do the buck shucking, will find a way to impose themselves.

The imposers, seem to have left the faith.

[ Post Comment ]


  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on July 13, 2001 at 17:43:02