Big Brother is Watching
Law enforcement surveillance has made dramatic advances in recent years, enhancing capabilities to a sometimes-concerning degree. Without question, it has made capturing criminals easier. Likewise, though, it has led to some serious ethical issues.
ALPRs
What could possibly be problematic about automated license plate readers (ALPRs)? They seem to be everywhere these days, assisting police in recognizing stolen vehicles, tracing objects of human trafficking and kidnapping, monitoring traffic infractions, and solving crimes. Additionally, they provide information to inform policymakers about traffic flow and transit interventions.
On the other hand, privacy violations, bias, and discrimination are major concerns. Innocent Americans have their habits and movements tracked, meaning their habits and activities exist in a database somewhere. What if that data is misused, compromised, or leaked? Furthermore, consider the possibility of particular communities being focused on based on their race, religion, or zip code?
You Have Nothing to Fear if You’re Innocent?
The old argument offered by some is that if you haven’t done anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about. But take that logic a few steps further, and it doesn’t seem quite as simple. At what point does the “you have nothing to worry about” mantra become problematic? How about if the government asked all citizens to carry location trackers? That seems a bit invasive, even to the most stringent enforcement proponents. Nonetheless, modern technology allows government tracking of one’s phone, mail, online activity, purchasing patterns, and driving habits. It appears full-on tracking is possible, whether or not citizens consent to carrying tracking devices. And the use of such technology puts society on a slippery slope. What is the future of, say, biometric tracking? As far back as 1998, former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani cheered on the idea of collecting newborns’ DNA data—and in other countries police wish to collect the DNA of kids who “exhibit behavior indicating they may become criminals later in life.”
Yes, these abilities help law enforcement authorities to identify and capture those guilty of criminal activities. But data is also vulnerable to misuse, abuse, theft, and hacks. How can we balance the use of such technologies against the potential for harm?
Questions to Consider
Gary Marx, an M.I.T professor who studied the issue, proposes evaluating surveillance methods before implementing them, including:
- Is unwarranted psychological or physical harm caused?
- Are those responsible for the surveillance subject to it?
- Is there public knowledge and consent?
- Is it subject to human review?
- Can conclusions be challenged and grieved?
- Are community goals served?
- Are less costly/troublesome methods available?
- Are legitimate goals being pursued?
- Are adequate safety measures in place to protect against misuse?
Protecting Your Rights
The experienced Las Vegas criminal defense attorneys at Lobo Law always fight to protect our clients’ rights. To discuss your concerns, schedule a confidential consultation in our Las Vegas office today.
Source:
police1.com/ethical-frontiers-the-unintended-consequences-of-surveillance-technologies
