Public Safety

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.

Regardless of where one stands on police reform, banning facial recognition for law enforcement makes little sense. To understand the reasons, consider some of the most popular ideas for responding to police violence.

The COVID crisis has shifted the data privacy debate away from its prior focus on individual rights to one more focused on collective needs and responsibilities—for example, when it comes to sharing and analyzing medial data related to the pandemic, or tracking individuals’ contacts. Rob and Jackie discuss these issues with noted scholar and public intellectual Amitai Etzioni.

The most common facial-recognition applications are benign—and Fourth Amendment protections, coupled with deeply held views about civil liberties, put limits on what government can do.

Rob Atkinson explains in the National Review that with the proper safeguards, facial-recognition technology can help law enforcement catch criminals.

The Massachusetts Joint Committee on the Judiciary will hold a hearing on October 22 to consider a bill that would enact a statewide of ban of government use of facial recognition technology. This is the latest overreaction to the fear, uncertainty, and doubt that activists have managed to harness into legislative action, and it risks far-reaching unintended consequences.

A coalition of 39 organizations and individuals from prominent research institutions, trade associations, law enforcement groups, and technology companies advocates for appropriate safeguards so that law enforcement can use facial recognition technology safely, accurately, and effectively.