A Law to Spy Back on Government Surveillance Cameras?

mattnyc99 writes "As the Senate begins debate today on wider new surveillance legislation, Instapundit blogger and University of Tennessee law professor Glenn Reynolds has an interesting op-ed as part of Popular Mechanics' cover story on the looming power of spy cameras in America. He cites numerous court cases to argue that our privacy concerns may be backwards, and that there should be a new law for citizen rights — that if Big Brother can keep an eye on us in public spaces, we ought to be able to look back. From the accompanying podcast: 'Realistically I don't think we're going to get much in the way of limits on government and business surveillance. So I think we should be focusing more on making it safe, on making it a double-edged sword.'"

Comments

Don't worry

[elrous0]

I'm sure our brave Democrats will hold hearings on it just as soon as they cave to the President's latest totalitarian demands once again.

Reverse Surveillance

[Raindance]

Well, I think anyone really interested in the idea of reverse surveillance should read Obama's innovation plan.

From the "open government" part of the plan:

Requiring his appointees who lead Executive Branch departments and rulemaking agencies to conduct the significant business of the agency in public, so that any citizen can watch a live feed on the Internet as the agencies debate and deliberate the issues that affect American society. He will ensure that these proceedings are archived for all Americans to review, discuss and respond. He will require his appointees to employ all the technological tools available to allow citizens not just to observe, but also to participate and be heard in these meetings.

There's more, as summarized by Ars:
        * Put government data online for citizen access, analysis, commentary, and action. The document cites environmental data on pollution as one type that could be made available.
        * Effectively "crowd-sourcing" (though that term isn't used) some amount of agency decision-making by tapping the public's distributed expertise.
        * Build an online database that enables citizens to track federal grants, contracts, earmarks, and lobbyist contacts with government officials.
        * Give "the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House web site for five days before signing any non-emergency legislation."

Two wrongs don't make a right

[jockeys]

Us doing it to them doesn't really make them doing it to us and less wrong.

The medicine is still nasty underneath all that sugar.

Re:Two wrongs don't make a right

[0xdeadbeef]

The ability to monitor the government is a necessary foundation for free and open society. It is not a second "wrong", it's a fundamental right that has been increasingly trampled upon.

Employee supervision

[Harmonious Botch]

Just a modest proposal: Every government employee - except for those working on confidential stuff - should have a 24-hour PUBLIC webcam on his desk ( The camera need not point at the desk, just at the person ) , his car, or wherever he/she works. Police / sheriff / prison employees / corrections officers, etc or anyone who may at some time have someone in custody should have two separate cameras in case one malfunctions.

Re:Employee supervision

[Anonymous Coward]

I would really have liked the showercam for my 8th grade French teacher, Miss Galando.

noooo

[dotpavan]

that would kill the "in Soviet Russia.." meme

Sousveillance

[Rob T Firefly]

This sort of thing is often known as Sousveillance.

It just so happens that this coming Monday, December 24th is orld Sousveillance day.

I agree

[gurps_npc]

We need the following laws: 1. It it NEVER illegal to make any audio recording of an on-duty government employee

2. It is never illegal to make a video or other recording og a clothed on-duty government employee.

3. It is illegal for any government employee to request or insist that such a device be deactivated. Attempting to do so results in a fine equal to one day's pay. If violence was used, they are too be dismissed immediately, even if it was 'justified' by other actions. I.E. If you tell them to stop filming and they hit you, then you hit them back, you get fired even though 'they started it.'

4. If a government employee takes possesion of a a recording device that is not theirs and a recording is damaged, it must be returned in 100% working condition, with a copy of any recordings on it, within 2 days. Failure results in an investigation by Police, or by Internal Affairs if they are police. If a court case finds that there is a preponderous evidence that the employee intentionally damaged the device or the recording, than that employee will be dismissed from their government position. If the court find they did it beyond a shadow of a doubt, they are to be arrested and tried for grand theft.

Re:I agree

[swillden]

It is never illegal to make a video or other recording of a clothed on-duty government employee. So anyone can make a recording of the on-duty government employee who's changing the launch codes for the nukes? Or the state-paid lawer who's talking with a client? Or the government doctor who is reviewing someone's medical records?

[Emphasis mine]

This should result in some interesting new security policies. Government employees will now be required to strip before doing anything that requires secrecy.

Paging David Brin

[StarEmperor]

The Transparent Society