San Diego Police Want To Add Surveillance Tech: 500 Streetlight Cameras Plus License Plate Readers (sandiegouniontribune.com) 24
San Diego Union-Tribune: Almost three years ago, the city of San Diego cut off access to its broad network of Smart Streetlights -- more than 3,000 devices perched atop light poles that could collect images and other data, some of which the Police Department used to solve criminal cases. The city removed that access, at least without a warrant, because of concerns from the public about surveillance and privacy issues. On Wednesday, the San Diego Police Department said it wants access to 500 of those devices to be restored -- and they want to add another crime-solving tool to the network: automated license plate readers.
The controversy surrounding the Smart Streetlights began in 2019 when it was revealed that the cameras had been installed without public input. Police started accessing the camera footage in 2018 for investigations. Direct access was cut off in 2020 as a result of public outcry. Because the Smart Streetlight cameras had not been well maintained over the years, the city would need to install new cameras. Adding the license plate reader technology would mark the first time the city of San Diego would have the readers in fixed locations. This is the first big push for surveillance technology in San Diego since the city approved ordinances last year specifically setting rules to govern this kind of technology in light of privacy concerns.
The controversy surrounding the Smart Streetlights began in 2019 when it was revealed that the cameras had been installed without public input. Police started accessing the camera footage in 2018 for investigations. Direct access was cut off in 2020 as a result of public outcry. Because the Smart Streetlight cameras had not been well maintained over the years, the city would need to install new cameras. Adding the license plate reader technology would mark the first time the city of San Diego would have the readers in fixed locations. This is the first big push for surveillance technology in San Diego since the city approved ordinances last year specifically setting rules to govern this kind of technology in light of privacy concerns.
It's For The Children! (Score:1)
We will only use it to catch pedophiles and possible future pedophiles.
Re: (Score:1)
Clearly everybody that has the equipment in their possession to be a pedo (i.e. a "body") needs to be locked up! Exception: The police, because a) they can do not wrong and b) they were just only doing research raping those children, obviously.
Re: (Score:2)
troubling.
when law enforcement says
its for the children
Re: (Score:2)
Yep, law enforcement is thinking a bit too much about the children these days.
The war on freedom continues (Score:4, Interesting)
Because that is what it is.Oh, you want freedom and be able to do things in private? What are you, some sort of pervert? We better lock you up preventively!
Re: The war on freedom continues (Score:2)
It seems clear that they would rather put surveillance everywhere than actually enforce the laws on the books, prosecute criminals, or do anything that would have a meaningful impact on keeping the city safe.
Re: (Score:2)
Obviously. Because what happens if the police is effective at reducing crime and protecting people? They get downsized! So they have a massive interest in keeping the fear up and not actually solving any problems. Ever wondered why small-time drug-dealers or couriers get arrested all the time, but hardly ever any of the higher-ups? It allows the police to pretend to be doing something without actually harming their meal-ticket.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems clear that they would rather put surveillance everywhere than actually enforce the laws on the books, prosecute criminals, or do anything that would have a meaningful impact on keeping the city safe.
If "they" wish to put survellience everywhere and it's NOT for crime, then what the FUCK is it for?
Every taxpayer should be asking that question, and right NOW. Because what mass surveillance should NOT be turned into, is another form of selling YOU as a product. And we're being goosestepped right down that fucking path, so start asking. WHO the fuck is THEY?
We act like social media hasn't fucked up society, turning narcissism into some kind of valued trait.
Instead of the police using the cameras (Score:2)
Good idea (Score:2)
Just to expedite access for the police, we're going to automate the process.
First, you'll have to go to a physical website and fill out a form - we're concerned about your privacy, so we won't store anything or have accounts. So, you'll need all of your important information including badge number, date of hire, date of last review, date of last promotion.
And we've got you covered, so you'll also need all of that information for whomever was administratively on the duty desk at the precinct time(s) that yo
Better idea. (Score:5, Insightful)
How about we add police accountability instead. The good news is that it's inexpensive and does more to help everyday citizens.
Re:Better idea. (Score:4, Interesting)
It might not actually be inexpensive. We hear that some police officers are quitting at the mere mention of accountability. Replacing them with good officers will probably cost more. I would gladly support an increase in officer pay in conjunction with an increase in accountability.
Streetlight cameras also do impact accountability. The gentleman who was beaten to death in Memphis last month was only noted because a streetlight camera caught the beating. If it weren't for that camera, it would have just been another "medical emergency" where all the officers happened to misplace their body cameras.
On a gut level, I don't like the idea of cameras everywhere. But practically speaking, the phone you carry everywhere is already spying on you at a much deeper level than a simple camera.
Could fighting the people abusing the tech be more effective than fighting the tech itself? It seems to cut more directly to the core issue, which is having abusers in power.
Re: (Score:2)
It might not actually be inexpensive. We hear that some police officers are quitting at the mere mention of accountability. Replacing them with good officers will probably cost more
What you are omitting is that millions that have to be paid out because of bad officers and the taxpayers are footing the bill. It's cheaper to have better accountability.
Re: (Score:1)
Why NOT allow real-time camera access/review of the watchers be allowed?
The largest determent to crime is the threat of being caught and punished. If those who can watch the public know they are being watched.. Look at what just happened in the USA/Memphis, TN. when police themselves were "policed" by... cameras...
AI to the rescue... (Score:2)
Police won't like it, but this will happen in a few years. Police likely think it can't be done since a decent sized city could generate thousands of hours of video daily. But imagine an AI that can be trained to watch and report on anything it finds odd, inappropriate, and/or illegal. It could likely whittle those thousands of hours/day down to a few dozen that a small dedicated group of private citizens (bored old people) can audit.
Re: (Score:2)
Police misconduct is greatly exaggerated by the politically driven media for ratings and clicks.
We need retraining of society, to be more civil and considerate of others. It's time to bring back law, order and discipline.
Or you could move to China (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And the point is? (Score:2)