Secret Laws, secret courts, no budget disclosure, no oversight, and plenty of poorly vetted private contractors.
What could possibly go wrong with a Security/Surveillance State?
I can validate this. If your photo was taken for a state ID
or Drivers License it is accessible through the Law Enforcement
Information Network. (LEIN) For what its worth, in order to access this
information you have to have been trained and recertified annually. The
restrictions on its use are very limited, and indeed must be for law
enforcement purposes, demonstrated by including a complaint number and
the officers own personal information. The use of LEIN is highly
monitored for any unauthorized or illegal use. Officers are required to
have written documentation on their daily log as to the use of and
purpose of its use. The penalties for unofficial use are stiff and very
unforgiving. FWIW
I have found having an image of a dangerous felon to have been a useful tool.
The faces of more than
120 million people are in searchable photo databases that state
officials assembled to prevent driver's-license fraud but that
increasingly are used by police to identify suspects, accomplices and
even innocent bystanders in a wide range of criminal investigations.
The
facial databases have grown rapidly in recent years and generally
operate with few legal safeguards beyond the requirement that searches
are conducted for "law enforcement purposes." Amid rising concern about
the National Security Agency's high-tech surveillance aimed at foreigners, it is these state-level facial-recognition
The most widely used systems were honed on the battlefields of
Afghanistan and Iraq as soldiers sought to identify insurgents. The
increasingly widespread deployment of the technology in the United
States has helped police find murderers, bank robbers and drug dealers,
many of whom leave behind images on surveillance videos or social-media
sites that can be compared against official photo databases.
But law enforcement use of such facial searches is blurring the
traditional boundaries between criminal and non-criminal databases,
putting images of people never arrested in what amount to perpetual
digital lineups. The most advanced systems allow police to run searches
from laptop computers in their patrol cars and offer access to the FBI
and other federal authorities.
Such open access has caused a backlash in some of the few states
where there has been a public debate. As the databases grow larger and
increasingly connected across jurisdictional boundaries, critics warn
that authorities are developing what amounts to a national
identification system — based on the distinct geography of each human
face.
“Where is government going to go with that years from now?” said
Louisiana state Rep. Brett Geymann, a conservative Republican who has
fought the creation of such systems there. “Here your driver’s license
essentially becomes a national ID card.”
Facial-recognition technology is part of a new generation of
biometric tools that once were the stuff of science fiction but are
increasingly used by authorities around the nation and the world. Though
not yet as reliable as fingerprints, these technologies can help
determine identity through individual variations in irises, skin
textures, vein patterns, palm prints and a person’s gait while walking.
The Supreme Court’s approval this month of DNA collection during arrests
coincides with rising use of that technology as well, with suspects in
some cases submitting to tests that put their genetic details in
official databases, even if they are never convicted of a crime.
Facial-recognition systems are more pervasive and can be deployed
remotely, without subjects knowing that their faces have been captured.
Today’s driver’s-
license databases, which also include millions of images of people who get non-driver ID cards to open bank accounts or board airplanes, typically were made available for police searches with little public notice.
license databases, which also include millions of images of people who get non-driver ID cards to open bank accounts or board airplanes, typically were made available for police searches with little public notice.
Thirty-seven states now use facial-recognition technology in
their driver’s-license registries, a Washington Post review found. At
least 26 of those allow state, local or federal law enforcement agencies
to search — or request searches — of photo databases in an attempt to
learn the identities of people considered relevant to investigations.
“This is a tool to benefit law enforcement, not to violate your
privacy rights,” said Scott McCallum, head of the facial-recognition
unit in Pinellas County, Fla., which has built one of the nation’s most
advanced systems.
The technology produces investigative leads, not definitive
identifications. But research efforts are focused on pushing the
software to the point where it can reliably produce the names of people
in the time it takes them to walk by a video camera. This already works
in controlled, well-lit settings when the database of potential matches
is relatively small. Most experts expect those limitations to be
surmounted over the next few years.
That prospect has sparked fears that the databases authorities
are building could someday be used for monitoring political rallies,
sporting events or even busy downtown areas. Whatever the security
benefits — especially at a time when terrorism remains a serious threat —
the mass accumulation of location data on individuals could chill free
speech or the right to assemble, civil libertarians say.
“As a society, do we want to have total surveillance? Do we want
to give the government the ability to identify individuals wherever they
are . . . without any immediate probable cause?” asked
Laura Donohue, a Georgetown University law professor who has studied
government facial databases. “A police state is exactly what this turns
into if everybody who drives has to lodge their information with the
police.”
A facial ‘template'
