Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

ilga.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 265 posts

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#131

Post by abeppu »

ryandrake wrote: post #94
mulmen wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I agree. It's helpful to remember: for every law you like and want promoted to the federal level, there's another law you probably don't like that someone else thinks would be great to promote to the federal level. Although moving states to flee terrible laws is a burden, it's not as much of a burden as fleeing your entire country. Laws should be as local as practically possible.

A kamikaze drone can have a variable blast radius that can kill a vehicle's driver but not passengers. That sounds extremely local.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/military/kamikaze-drones-new-we...

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#132

Post by jonathanstrange »

Zetice wrote: post #110
FredPret wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

How does one "feel surveilled"?

You've never felt like someone is watching you?

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#133

Post by Zetice »

jonathanstrange wrote: post #132
Zetice wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does one "feel surveilled"?

You've never felt like someone is watching you?

I understand such a feeling is purely made up and not worth acknowledging, so I don't legitimize that thought.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#134

Post by igorstellar »

km3r wrote: post #91

Am I the only one that is OK with CCTV + facial recognition? Seems like a great way to tackle crime without having to involve potentially deadly encounters with police. Ya there are ways it could be abused, but I assume I have no privacy (as does the law) when I am in a public space. A lot cheaper than cops too. Put laws and systems in place to keep the data secure and require warrants to access the data. (No lethal…

It sounds completely surreal to have cameras and face id everywhere, but this is already done by our phones (face recognition) and GPS tracking, full surveillance of any messaging activity (with rare exceptions) for no good reason other than selling ads. Having less gun violence and deadly police interactions can actually use this technology for something better than just ads served by corporations (and also sell this data to anyone who pays). We should be careful about who can access these systems though.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#135

Post by nathan_compton »

mulmen wrote: post #70
abeppu wrote: 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.

Doesn't this kind of depend on the law? Do you really think "guns and and facial recognition on drones" is the kind of thing we have to do experiments on? I kind of get where you're coming from in the sense that it is scary for so much power over so many people to be concentrated in such a small place, but, on the other hand, when the case is simple or the moral calculus is clear enough, I think we ought not feel a strong compunction against action at a federal level.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#136

Post by dogsgobork »

tinyhouse wrote: post #96

Instead of fixing issues like bias with facial recognition, they prefer to ban it instead. And Illinois of all places, where the crime is out of control. Who will suffer the most? you guess it right, those who they are trying to protect... Go figure.

>Illinois of all places, where the crime is out of control

Is it? From what I've found Illinois is fairly middle of the pack vs other states.

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#138

Post by [deleted] »

monksy wrote: post #54
remyp wrote: 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

#139

Post by [deleted] »

MereInterest wrote: post #111
glitchc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A federal law can only apply to FBI, National Guard, Coast Guard and other federally managed law enforcement bodies. It cannot apply to the various state and county police authorities. Governance of those is a right explicitly granted to each state and county, and the states/counties will fight tooth and nail to retain it.

That doesn't quite make sense to me. A federal policy or a federal executive order only applying to federally-managed bodies, I could understand. But federal laws outweigh state and local laws.

[deleted]

Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones

#140

Post by nathan_compton »

Zetice wrote: post #109
giraffe_lady wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not something you get instead of cops, when technology is developed for policing it's always always in addition. So it's not cops vs facial rec it's cops with facial rec. American police have never been given a power that they have not chosen to abuse for personal or political reasons, and used against dissidents and the dispossessed. The abuses aren't theoretical they are inevitable and at huge scale. > Put law…

I agree with the idea that American police abuse their resources, and would abuse this resource if given the chance, and I think you mentioning it here is a great lesson for me and everyone else to remind us of the current situation for police. Where I fall short however is the resignation that this is how things must be, or that we'll forever be unable to change these things. If we can get this police abuse under co…

The punishments we dole out for committing crimes are disproportionately large at least in part to improve their deterrent effect given that many people who commit crimes may get away with them. If we can suddenly catch every single person who commits a crime, then the punishments should become less severe.
Post reply on HN