Live data from Hacker News

Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

ilga.gov

61–70 of 265 posts

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#61
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Police departments in the US basically don’t require legislation to add new functionality to their policing mechanisms, they require laws to tell them what they cannot do. So more the former than the latter. But it doesn’t really matter with this for the average citizen, most likely. They’ll only ever use the drones for big busts. Most cops just sit in traffic until they get bored and chase down random beater cars th…

> Most cops just sit in traffic until they get bored and chase down random beater cars that were going 5 over the speed limit, or pulled slightly too far forward at a stop sign that had shrubs blocking the left and right view. That's also problematic!

not really, break the law get a ticket, that's how things are suppose to work. The problematic thing is the laws are rarely enforced.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#62
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good point. I would hope there's an exemption for bomb disposal robots, because functionally there's not that much difference between these and (basically) Killbotz: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSkYxW5Ii28

There shouldn't be an exemption on the equipment, but prohibition of using anything as a killbot. Dallas police used a bomb-disposal robot to remotely deliver a bomb to kill a suspect some years back. https://www.texastribune.org/2016/07/08/use-robot-kill-dalla...

It seems pretty easy to have an exception that allows bomb disposal without allowing bomb delivery.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#63
post #9

The facial recognition isn't on the drone, the cop just uploads the footage to a tagging service *trollface*

Illinois has very strong anti facial recognition / biometric law. Theres been a lot of class action lawsuits recently. I got like $300 from the facebook settlement alone. So this loophole wouldn't work either fortunately

This is true, but that law (BIPA) applies to private entities. i.e., government orgs and contractors are exempt. Regardless, this new legislation is good. I would like to see the complete inclusion of government organizations into needing to acquire consent.

https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/ilcs/ilcs3.asp?ActID=3004&C...

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#64
post #54
post #16

As an Illinois resident, voter, and taxpayer, I'm pleased by this. I don't think I've never been _happy_ with Illinois politicians, but this current set is meaningfully productive enough for me to consider plausible the idea of being happy with my government.

The state reps seem to be better. But our federal senators are pretty awful tankies. (Durban and Duckworth.. they'll full on send you a tone death letter about why encryption is awful after you send them your concerns)

I'm curious how they qualify as tankies? Neither of them are even socialist let alone some kind of authoritarian communist.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#65
post #54
post #16

As an Illinois resident, voter, and taxpayer, I'm pleased by this. I don't think I've never been _happy_ with Illinois politicians, but this current set is meaningfully productive enough for me to consider plausible the idea of being happy with my government.

The state reps seem to be better. But our federal senators are pretty awful tankies. (Durban and Duckworth.. they'll full on send you a tone death letter about why encryption is awful after you send them your concerns)

[deleted]

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#66

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)

What's scary is the number of CCTV cameras throughout Britain (not just London). I've never felt more surveilled than on a recent visit there.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#67
post #16

As an Illinois resident, voter, and taxpayer, I'm pleased by this. I don't think I've never been _happy_ with Illinois politicians, but this current set is meaningfully productive enough for me to consider plausible the idea of being happy with my government.

This and the privacy laws that illinois has like the Personal Information Protection act make me happy too. https://www.varonis.com/blog/illinois-privacy-law

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#68
post #46

[flagged]

Weird take. Policing is hard, sure. I don’t think flying guns with facial recognition are the solution we need. If this is what “defund the police” means then sign me up. Defund all their armed face scanning drones.

I'm not a fan either, but we demand more and more from the police, yet there is a powerful force ( mostly political ) to curb the resources the police can use.

I get both sides, but this road will have bad results. ( making Illinois into a police state is not a solution either )

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#69
post #54
post #16

As an Illinois resident, voter, and taxpayer, I'm pleased by this. I don't think I've never been _happy_ with Illinois politicians, but this current set is meaningfully productive enough for me to consider plausible the idea of being happy with my government.

The state reps seem to be better. But our federal senators are pretty awful tankies. (Durban and Duckworth.. they'll full on send you a tone death letter about why encryption is awful after you send them your concerns)

I don't like tankies, but what about that makes them a tankie rather than merely authoritarian?

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#70
post #51

Can we get a federal bill with the same prohibitions? It would be absurd if the right to be free from fear of automated death from the skies is left to a patchwork of state and local restrictions. Irresponsible arguments that I would totally not be surprised to hear to push in the opposite direction: - If law enforcement doesn't have armed drones, we live in a world where only the criminals have armed drones. - Somet…

I get the argument for federal laws but honestly I think it is misguided to want state laws promoted to a national level immediately. This is how law in the US evolves. The patchwork is a feature. A federal government with the agility to implement this law at a national level would have far too much power. The system is working.
Post reply on HN