How to Stop Cops from Abusing Technology – Datamation

Posted: April 8, 2012 by scaryhouse in Uncategorized

By Mike Elgan

Does new technology make us more free or less free?

It’s easy to say “both,” and point to examples on either side. And in fact, some uses of technology support the cause of individual liberty and others work against it.

I believe the biggest threat to our freedom in the long term is when governments or law enforcement agencies grab the exclusive right for themselves to use new technologies.

Here’s how it works. A new technology appears. Police say they can use it but citizens can’t. If this is accepted by the courts and the public, the government now has more power and citizens less.

Over time, the accumulation of these new powers upsets the balance of power between the state and the people, and our freedom is increasingly eroded.

One old example is the use of audio and video recording technology during police interrogations.

A century ago, no such recordings were made. Police interviewed suspects and witnesses. In court, it was the detective’s word against the suspect’s. But new tape recording and later video recording technology enabled a successful power grab by the police.

Police can record interrogations. Suspects cannot. As a result, both honest and abusive police have a technology advantage, and both innocent and guilty suspects have a disadvantage that didn’t used to exist before the technology existed.

Police can present any subset of an interrogation they like, or claim that it wasn’t recorded if the recording doesn’t support their case. The suspect has no such advantage, and is denied the opportunity to gather evidence of police misconduct.

There are much newer examples.

Local police spy and track via cell phone

A groundbreaking story in The New York Times this weekend revealed that hundreds of local police departments in the United States routinely spy on citizens via their cell phones, and track their locations, “with little or no court oversight.”

The article points out that cell phone carriers have set up profitable menus of services to offer to these departments, such as suspects’ locations, the tracing of texts and phone calls and others.

Any citizen requesting similar information would be denied.

It’s a new technology capability, and police are asserting a monopoly on its use. Even more disturbing is that this de facto monopoly on the use of these technologies is being granted not by congress or the courts, but by corporations.

We can also see new technology power grabs coming soon.

The drone wars

The widespread police use of remote-controlled drone aircraft predicted by just about everybody will raise some interesting legal questions. For example, can police use drones to peek into people’s backyards, or does that violate the Constitution’s 4th-Amendment protection against “unreasonable searches and seizures”?

One possibility is that, as with many technologies in the past, law enforcement agencies will be granted the exclusive right to use drone technology along with an exception to (or a new definition of) the 4th Amendment.

Another possibility was raised recently by John Villasenor, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution in an NPR interview. He points out that a 2001 case established that when “the government uses a device that is not in general public use to explore details of the home that would previously have been unknowable without physical intrusion, the surveillance is a search.”

In that case, if drones grow in popularity among consumers to the point where they can be found to be “in general public use” then drone spying on backyards would not be “searches,” and would thereby not be banned by the Constitution.

In either of the cases, the police would retain exclusive use of the information gathered by drones, as well as the knowledge of exact details of the surveillance.

Are we going to accept this?

The bigger question is this: What should a free society do in order to safeguard its freedom as new technologies come online?

Unfortunately, the Constitution doesn’t mention video cameras, cell phones or drones. But it clearly attempts to prevent government exclusivity over and use and control of, say, media technology or gun technology.

via How to Stop Cops from Abusing Technology – Datamation.

  1. Helen Jones says:

    I was just reading a blog written by The Rutherford Institute, I believe you will be interested to read their material, it’s consistent and corraborates with your own blogs. We are already not living in a “free” society. We are suppose to be a society of democracy, but while Americans had their heads turned chasing the “American Dream” The big bad Government was plotting to take away all of our rights under the US Constitution. When my son committed a heineous crime in 2009 I learned a lot. Law enforcers believed my son was living with me, so they illegally tapped my landline. When I moved away from the home where they installed a wire on the landline. They approached a so called family friend and he gave them my cellphone number and they tracked and tapped into it. I learned that they can actually see you through the phone display, of course they can listen to your incoming and outgoing calls. But, I was shocked to learn that they can hear you even when you are not making a phone call, and while the phone is off! That same family friend asked to install a Norton virus program into my computer, claiming he was “so concerned.” He ended up giving law enforcment access to both my laptop and my daughter’s desktop computers. They can see and hear through these devices, but they also can take over your mobile phones and computers and decide which messages you will send and receive! I learned this all from my experienes with the same law enforcement I was raised to respect and honor. I no longer have the same feelings or beliefs of law enforcment because of those experiences in 2009. Americans had better wakeup! No longer do we have privacy, the incident of 911 -supposedly, started a trickle down effect, so to speak, where our Government was allowed under The USA Patriot’s Act and -now I’ve recently learned about, the National Defense Authorization Act of 2012 (NDAA), under President Obama’s reign. You say Weber is bad and DSA Bruscato is better. I say Obama is better for the American people overall, but at the end of the day politics is politics and the American people are being terrorized upon, brainwashed, violated against and raped by our own government! What do we do? Pray, there is no other help and no easy answers.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s