Public Safety

Two recent headlines show that critics will go to absurd lengths to condemn tech, and policymakers should be wary of the potential consequences of so much misplaced blame.

STOP CSAM Act of 2023 is not an effective solution for protecting children and would come at the cost of decreased privacy and security for all users. Instead, Congress should focus on enabling law enforcement to more effectively protect victims and punish the perpetrators who create, solicit, or enable child sexual abuse material.

Congress should include support for autonomous track geometry measurement system in the Railways Safety Act to prevent future accidents. By investing in the development and testing of innovative technologies, Congress can help ensure that the nation’s rail system is safe and reliable.

Join ITIF for a panel discussion with policymakers and thought leaders about how to ensure that users can enjoy the benefits of AR/VR technology safely.

The TSA has begun testing facial recognition technology to verify passengers’ identities at 16 major airports. But opposition, including from cities with facial recognition bans, would force the TSA to continue to rely on outdated technology and place restrictions on innovation that would benefit passengers most of all.

Join ITIF in-person for a discussion about what emerging technologies are on the horizon for law enforcement and how police departments can get the most out of these technologies while addressing some of the legitimate concerns.

EFF tries to deflect criticism of its position by arguing law enforcement has many other tools at its disposal—but that claim is a crafty bit of misdirection because EFF has opposed those tools too.

Activists continue to lobby local governments for facial recognition technology bans, falsely arguing it is racist, sexist, and a threat to free speech. They dismiss or ignore all evidence showing how it keeps people safe, and some local officials have fallen for their arguments hook, line, and sinker.

Law enforcement argues that “warrant-proof” encryption presents a unique and urgent threat by preventing them from accessing user data. But history shows that government efforts to subvert encryption would negatively impact individuals and businesses. As such, banning the technology is not the answer.