Slashdot Mirror
Virginia Beach Goes For Facial Recognition
Raven42rac writes "
It appears that my hometown, Virginia Beach, after summarily rejecting those ridiculous facial recognition cameras, has recently become the second city in the nation to use them. (Yay we're number 2, pun intended.) Citing the ubiquitous 'everything is different now after 9-11' defense that has become ever popular in yanking away our rights and liberties. The whole shebang is explained in this article from my local newspaper's website, and unlike some online newspapers, this one is completely free, and no registration is required."
Seems like.
Yeah this seems to be a disturbing trend since 911. Our borders are wide open for people to come in (I'm not saying that's good or bad) and goverment control of everyday citizens is all that they can come up with.
The Patriot Act is one of the most stifling pieces of legislation I've ever seen. From a conservative standpoint, I feel the Republican party has completely 180'ed in the last year. Government control will not help. Mr. Bush, who I am not happy to say I voted for, has either kept or enlarged pretty much every fluffy program Clinton created. I'm not saying that they're all bad (they're irrelevant to my point), but the bicameral support promised after 9/11 has turned into the entire government encroaching on civil liberties. In fact, I hope that some Democrats may even agree with me here.
We have to learn that there are people in this world that will do some pretty destructive things, and that we're never wholly secure. The EU, Canada, and the US are all providing security at the cost of our freedom. Don't do it--it's a bad deal. And when and if the next attack comes, their solution will be even more tempting. Don't accept their FUD. People in other parts of the world live in much more hostile environments.
Sorry if this is somewhat of a rant, or possibly sounding a bit too much like FUD, but I'm hearing what's in store for computers and DRM, coupled with what's in store for our rights and privacy (namely the elimination therein), and I'm not liking the world that the next generation will grow up in.
Slashdot: Where people pretend to be twice as smart as they really are by behaving like children.
So now, people with outstanding felony warrants will no longer saunter down city streets and peruse the shopping malls in broad daylight. What a relief.
So how long until this wasteful tech spending becomes re-justified by using it instead to harass folks with outstanding parking tickets?
Start
here and
here.
Section 802 of the USA PATRIOT Act creates a federal crime of "domestic terrorism" that broadly extends to "acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws" if they "appear to be intended...to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion," and if they "occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States." How much more vague can you possibly get? This is going to end up being carte blanche.
Any political activist that chains himself to the doors of the local courthouse can be deemed a domestic terrorist. There goes Political Speech. This is the modern Alien and Sedition Acts.
Section 411 of the Act also poses an ideological test for entry into the United States that takes into consideration core political speech.
Section 213 of the Act authorizes federal agents to conduct "sneak and peek searches," or covert searches of a person's home or office that are conducted without notifying the person of the execution of the search warrant until after the search has been completed. Section 213 also authorizes the delay of notice of the execution of a warrant to conduct a seizure of items where the court finds a "reasonable necessity" for the seizure. Normal search warrants have to be conducted under the supervision of an appointee of the one being searched and anything seized must be inventoried and the inventory given.
Under Section 215, the Director of the FBI or a designee as low in rank as an Assistant Special Agent in Charge may apply for a court order requiring the production of "any tangible things (including books, records, papers, documents, and other items)" upon his written statement that these items are being sought for an investigation "to protect against international terrorism or clandestine intelligence activities." A judge presented with an application under Section 215 is required to enter an order if he "finds that the application meets the requirements of this section." Normally, an affidavit of probable cause by a 3rd party with first hand knowledge of the facts is required. No longer. As a result, Section 218 allows law enforcement agencies conducting a criminal investigation to circumvent the Fourth Amendment whenever they are able to claim that the gathering of foreign intelligence constitutes "a significant purpose." In doing so, Section 218 gives the FBI a green light to resume domestic spying on government "enemies"-a program that reached an ugly apex under J. Edgar Hoover's directorship.
Under Section 216 of the Act, courts are required to order the installation of a pen register and a trap and trace device31 to track both telephone and Internet "dialing, routing, addressing and signaling information" anywhere within the United States when a government attorney has certified that the information to be obtained is "relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation." No affidavit of probable cause is required. Once installed on an Internet Service Provider (ISP), Carnivore devours all of the communications flowing through the ISP's network-not just those of the target of surveillance but those of all users-and not just tracking information but content as well.
Section 203 of the USA PATRIOT Act authorizes the disclosure, without judicial supervision, of certain criminal and foreign intelligence information to officials of the FBI, CIA, and INS, as well as other federal agencies, where receipt of the information will "assist the official... in the performance of his official duties." So now, when the people cannot be spied upon by domestic agencies, they will acquire information from FORIEGN intelligence agencies that are spying on us. We reciprocate by sharing with them intelligence about their citizens, upon whom they are barred from spying.
Section 412 vastly inflates the Attorney General's power to detain immigrants who are suspected of falling into a class of persons engaged in terrorism. Upon no more than the Attorney General's unreviewed certification that he has "reasonable grounds to believe" that a non-citizen is engaged in terrorist activities or other activities that threaten the national security. The A.G. can effectively detain an immigrant forever.
Not expressly stated in the Act, but already in use by the federales is the labelling of a citizen as an "enemy combatant," scooping him up without a warrant, no affidavit of probable cause, no counsel, no charges, no bail, commit him to a FISA military tribunal, try him without counsel, refuse him an opportunity to introduce evidence that can impeach adverse witnesses, find him guilty, sentence him to death and execute him.
Those of us who remember the mistakes of history are doomed to be subjected to idiots who alow them to be repeated.
Liberty is not a concept... Liberty is a way of life!!!
Any political activist that chains himself to the doors of the local courthouse can be deemed a domestic terrorist. There goes Political Speech. This is the modern Alien and Sedition Acts.
Your argument is at best a bit tortured. Are you suggesting that chaining yourself to a courthouse door was legal before USA PATRIOT?
For that matter, can you point to any evidence that would support your rather tortured claim that such behavior meets the definition provided in USA PATRIOT?
Section 411 of the Act also poses an ideological test for entry into the United States that takes into consideration core political speech.
I hate to break it to you, but entering the US as a non-citizen is a privilege, not a right, as the Supreme Court has ruled again and again.
Section 213 of the Act authorizes federal agents to conduct "sneak and peek searches," or covert searches of a person's home or office that are conducted without notifying the person of the execution of the search warrant until after the search has been completed. Section 213 also authorizes the delay of notice of the execution of a warrant to conduct a seizure of items where the court finds a "reasonable necessity" for the seizure. Normal search warrants have to be conducted under the supervision of an appointee of the one being searched and anything seized must be inventoried and the inventory given.
First off, this is nothing new -- there are plenty of other areas for which such searches are authorized. Or did you think that when the police, with warrant, tap a phone or bug a residence they notify the subject? So again, this is nothing new -- and again, such searches have been used against organized crime and other RICO figures for years, and have been upheld in court.
Under Section 216 of the Act, courts are required to order the installation of a pen register and a trap and trace device31 to track both telephone and Internet "dialing, routing, addressing and signaling information" anywhere within the United States when a government attorney has certified that the information to be obtained is "relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation." No affidavit of probable cause is required. Once installed on an Internet Service Provider (ISP), Carnivore devours all of the communications flowing through the ISP's network-not just those of the target of surveillance but those of all users-and not just tracking information but content as well.
At the risk of stating the obvious, no law short of a constitutional ammendment can `require' courts to approve any search or seizure. This section, which you try so hard to misconstrue, merely sets new guidelines for requests -- and it isn't a change in law, but rather countermands a standing executive order.
Section 203 of the USA PATRIOT Act authorizes the disclosure, without judicial supervision, of certain criminal and foreign intelligence information to officials of the FBI, CIA, and INS
Again, the only thing preventing such information sharing before was an executive order -- this was never illegal, and has been upheld in the courts.
Section 412 vastly inflates the Attorney General's power to detain immigrants who are suspected of falling into a class of persons engaged in terrorism.
Again, immigration is a privilege, not a right. While your interpretation of this ammendment is at best contentious (the supreme court has always placed limits on the amount of time someone can be held before expulsion, and USA PATRIOT makes no attempt to change these limits), this is still not a civil rights issue.
Not expressly stated in the Act, but already in use by the federales is the labelling of a citizen as an "enemy combatant,"
Umm, hello? This practice goes back to the earliest days of our republic, and was upheld by the Supreme Court most recently in the 1942 case Ex Parte Quirin -- see this journal entry for details.
So, again, nothing you mention here is new, and nothing you mention here changes the nature of any of your existing constitutional rights.
So, I'm going to ask you again: can you name a single right which you think you had on September 10, 2001 which you think you do not have now?
I think the point that hasn't come across yet is that while the Patriot Act doesn't really present the government with new and unyielding power, it does weaken the check-and-balance system in place for its existing power. The provisions of wiretapping and surveillance are a pretty clear example of this. Yes, the government has always had the power to do this, but the requirements for doing so have been reduced. Another example is student data -- data which was formerly held in strict confidence is now readily available for surveillance use.
The powers haven't changed, but the ability to use them has. I can now be wiretapped without reasonable suspect (section 206) -- while this power was available to the government in 1986, a warrant was needed. With 206 in place, there is no such need. This appears to be a violation of the 4th Amendment - not because the government has gained any new power...they've just got a new way to use it.
USA PATRIOT does explicitly make legal some things which were long ago ruled legal, but which the executive branch had voluntarily chosen not to do, such as search the web, or listen to speeches given in public. None of these make any change in what your rights are under law, however.
If you want to argue that an FBI agent looking for al Qaeda members should not be able to go to Google and type in `al Qaeda' (the situation before USA PATRIOT and the attendant executive orders), go ahead, but I can't see any grounds for considering allowing him to do so a diminishment of anyone's rights.
Virginia Beach police in general tend to be overzealous; because it's the location of the state police acadamy a lot of their police officers are new to the job. I'm sorry to say that I don't trust the Virginia Beach police to not misuse this monitoring system.
Very interesting report in the latest New Scientist about it(not on their website yet so can't link).
Basically, it's too easily fooled by even basic disguses like a pair of glasses, you have to be at the right angle to the camera, the lighting has to be right etc etc. It barely works in controlled environments like airports without setting the sensitivity settings such a human has to double-check everything anyway, which defeats the purpose. So it has little chance of being effective in public spaces.
Forget about it!
I have to say that I have no problem at all recognising a facial - and I don't need a computer to help me (though they do come in handy for downloading the mpegs from Kazaa!) :-D
That's kind of a straw man argument. What is being said here is not that the FBI should be unable to do things in public, it is that the FBI should not be able to act with impunity in absence of a crime as they did in the COINTELPRO days.
In answer to your question look at the EFF's executive summary here.
"First it allows ISPs to voluntarily hand over all "non-content" information to law enforcement with no need for any court order or subpoena. sec. 212. Second, it expands the records that the government may seek with a simple subpoena (no court review required) to include records of session times and durations, temporarily assigned network (I.P.) addresses; means and source of payments, including credit card or bank account numbers. secs. 210, 211." -- Sec 1.C
You can also take a look at the case of Jose Padilla (here and here) an American Citizen who is being denied his constitutional right to due process.
My girlfriend and I went to Virginia Beach on the weekend of July 13th to see Dave Matthews Band, the very weekend that the cameras were scheduled to be turned on. If I had known about the cameras prior to making hotel reservations and acquiring tickets, I probably would have skipped the trip. But having made a financial committment to going, I wasn't about to back out. But I did let them know that I wasn't happy.
First, I called their tourism bureau (1-800-VA BEACH) in an attempt to determine where the cameras would be, such that I could avoid that area. The woman had no idea, and asked why I wanted to know. I explained -- without getting into lots of details about privacy -- that I was not comfortable having the cameras watching me, despite the fact that I was not, to my knowledge, wanted by any police department. And, as a matter of fact, I was on the verge of cancelling my trip, I told her. The woman was troubled, and directed me to call the police department.
That went about as well as you could imagine. I talked to a cop there that figured that anybody that didn't want to be on their cameras was obviously a law-breaker. But, hey, he told me the streets that the cameras were on, and I told him that I would certainly not be patronizing businesses along that stretch.
Did I make a difference? I have no idea. If one person calls, they'll think he's crazy. And if two, two people call...they'll think they're queer. But, friends, can you imagine three -- three people -- walking in, sitting down, and humming a bar of Alice's Restaurant? Friends, we'd have a movement -- the Virginia Beach Massacree. [1]
-Waldo Jaquith
[1] "Alice's Restaurant," Arlo Guthrie