Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

Post by mulmen » Fri, Jun 16, 2023, 4:59 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #28

I don't understand the issue with facial recognition if it is only used as a lead, and isn't considered evidence in and of itself, and a person's rights are respected even if they are flagged by the facial recognition software. If the issue is disparate success rates between races or other demographics, then let's just fuzz the incoming data until it's all equal. Facial recognition still sounds like an incredibly use…

Post by mulmen » Fri, Jun 16, 2023, 5:00 PM UTC

selectodude wrote: post #30

beepbopboopp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should go look at the ratio between administrative costs and actual beat cop salaries. The rising cost of college and the rising cost of law enforcement/defense suffers from a similar decay of middle men leaches just creating fees. Also as a note, theres not a lot of correlation between an increase and violence and reduced weapons policy, its almost driven by some secondary macro trend.

The CPD has one of the lowest admin:beat cop ratios in the country. It's like 12:1. They're already about as lean as it gets.

Post by piperswe » Fri, Jun 16, 2023, 5:05 PM UTC

DonaldPShimoda wrote: post #22

shipscode wrote: post #13

The title confused me a bit, Illinois isn't prohibiting weapon recognition on drones, it's prohibiting putting weapons on drones. Also, the act doesn't appear to have any legal consequences, so I wonder if it actually holds any teeth.

> The title confused me a bit, Illinois isn't prohibiting weapon recognition on drones, it's prohibiting putting weapons on drones. This is normal title style for a news headline and has been for a very long time; the comma here is short for "and".

Post by LeFantome » Fri, Jun 16, 2023, 5:06 PM UTC

samwillis wrote: post #5

As a Brit, watching the militarisation of the US police force is kinda scary. Hearing about successful push back and positive legislation is good. A quick bit of Googling, I can't find any evidence of weapons a being placed on police drones in Illinois, so this seems preemptive, which is good to see! (Our own police force has many of its own problems)

Post by localplume » Fri, Jun 16, 2023, 5:06 PM UTC

oh_sigh wrote: post #28

I don't understand the issue with facial recognition if it is only used as a lead, and isn't considered evidence in and of itself, and a person's rights are respected even if they are flagged by the facial recognition software. If the issue is disparate success rates between races or other demographics, then let's just fuzz the incoming data until it's all equal. Facial recognition still sounds like an incredibly use…