The Justice Department, which oversees the FBI and all other federal law enforcement arms, has memos that detail just how and when they can track citizens via GPS. But, they want to keep these memos to themselves. They have refused to release their views on GPS tracking to the public through requests by the ACLU. Instead, they forward copies of the memos with huge sections blacked out. Now, why would a governmental agency in a nation “for the people” be so compelled to keep quiet something that could possibly threaten the liberty in which the country was founded upon? [Read more…]
The “Stingray”, Government’s New Tracking and Surveillance Tool
Have you ever heard of a “stingray”? No, not the kind that swims around in the ocean, but the kind that can be used by the government to track your every move, down to a few meters. If not, you aren’t alone. And the ACLU alleges there is a very good reason for this—that the government doesn’t want you to know about stingrays so they can continue using them with little oversight. [Read more…]
Current Rules on GPS Tracking by Police Vague
The vast majority of us have smart phones. And these phones can tell anyone with access to the phone company where we are at any given time, what numbers we call, and even the contents of our text messages. But, how much of this information is available to the police when they are investigating a crime? [Read more…]
Man Faces Over 20 Years in Prison for Exposing Police Brutality
A school liaison officer and employee of the Manchester, New Hampshire police department made a questionable arrest involving physical force on a 17 year old student who offered no threat or resistance. The entire scene was caught on camera. That footage was made public, as were subsequent telephone interviews. Now, the man responsible for going public with the evidence is the one facing jail time—21 years to be exact. [Read more…]
Drone privacy bill aims to protect individuals from surveillance
Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) has proposed a bill that would require the Federal Aviation Administration to establish privacy safeguards for drone operators. The bill also aims to create limits on data collection by law enforcement agencies that use drones in the field.
Markey, who is co-Chair of the Congressional Bi-Partisan Privacy Caucus, submitted the discussion draft of the Drone Aircraft Privacy and Transparency Act of 2012 on August 1.
Markey’s bill highlights the impending integration of drones into domestic airspace by October 2015, as required by the Federal Aviation Administration Modernization and Reform Act signed by President Obama this February, as well as acknowledges that government agencies at all levels have increasingly been using unmanned aircraft, as have “businesses and private individuals.”
While the bill acknowledges that there are undoubtedly beneficial applications of the technology, it also emphasizes the glaring potential “for unmanned aircraft system technology to enable invasive and pervasive surveillance without adequate privacy protections.” This potential for misuse and abuse of the technology for surveillance of private citizens is exacerbated by a complete lack of “explicit privacy protections or public transparency measures with respect to such system technology.” Markey’s bill aims to fill that void when it comes to privacy protections from drone surveillance.
If passed, the drone privacy bill would require a study by the Secretary of Transportation (who oversees the FAA), the Secretary of Commerce, the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Homeland Security into “potential threats to privacy protections posed by the integration of unmanned aircraft systems into the national airspace system.”
The bill would also prohibit the FAA from granting drone operation licenses to entities, governmental or private, without a data collection statement from the license applicant. Such a data collection statement would include information regarding: chain-of-command to authorize the use of drones; locations of operation; maximum flight times; whether the drone in question will collect information or data about individuals or groups.
If drones will be used to collect data on individuals or groups, the operator must further indicate: circumstances under which this information will be collected; what kind of information will be collected; how such information will be used, disclosed, sold and stored. The data collection statement must also include an estimation of possible impact the drone in question may have on individual privacy and the steps operators will take to mitigate those impacts.
Markey’s bill would further require law enforcement agencies and their subcontractors to submit a “data minimization” statement along with their application for operation licenses to the FAA. This statement would include a review of policies adopted to minimize the collection of data unrelated to criminal investigation and to require the destruction of data once it is no longer relevant to said investigation. The data minimization statement would also include audit and oversight procedures to ensure the agency or contractor in question complies with these policies.
The draft bill would also require law enforcement agencies to obtain a warrant to use drones for generalized surveillance without a particular target.
Legislation of this kind is clearly needed: as over 100 agencies across the country have already applied to the FAA for licenses to operate drones, each day that goes by without explicit privacy protections makes the absence of such guidelines even more glaring. Markey’s bill is clearly a starting point for the type of conversation the country needs around drone technology, privacy and law enforcement surveillance capabilities.
ACLU Launches Effort Against Automatic License Plate Readers (ALPR)
This week the ACLU announced it was launching a “nationwide effort” to find out more about how law enforcement is using automatic license plate readers (ALPR) and what can be done to ensure the rights of the people are protected in their usage. They admit that not a lot is known about how various agencies are using the technology—which snaps a photo of your license plate as you pass by. [Read more…]
When Cops Use Cameras Too
In recent years we’ve seen many stories of people catching the police on camera. Whether the footage involved brutality or showed evidence that was contrary to police reports, the controversy of people filming police has been very real and a relevant issue in these times that everyone has a camera on them. But, some police departments have joined in, in an effort to show their techie-side and, in some cases, to clear their name. [Read more…]
Domestic Drones to Be Armed?
We’ve posted about the use of drones by domestic law enforcement agencies here before. And as if the privacy concerns of the little “eyes in the skies” aren’t scary enough, some agencies are now talking about arming the drones. [Read more…]
Cell Phone Tracking “Routine” for Police
It’s something police departments don’t really like to talk about, because they know it will garner serious backlash and could spur tighter restrictions. It’s the use of cell phones to track people and gain intelligence, often without a warrant or court approval. [Read more…]
Taser International Tests New Cop-Cameras
In the latest effort to get cops equipped with cameras, Taser International is sending out test models of a new wearable cam. The company hopes it will be an easy sell as they have several cases where such cameras ultimately cleared officers of wrongdoing. They also hope they can save face considering their Taser weapons have been nothing short of controversial in recent years. [Read more…]
