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.
Illinois also just banned the practice of banning books :)
Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
81–90 of 265 posts
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I am flagged by facial recognition software my rights have already been violated. This is a bad idea even before we consider that LEO is composed of fallible human beings with an established history of abusing the information systems they already possess.
What right of yours was violated if you were flagged by facial recognition?
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#83Can 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…
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#84Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#85Slightly OT: I noticed Colorado, Connecticut, New Mexico, and New York City either ended or limited qualified immunity in recent years. (In other states similar efforts faltered, apparently thanks to police unions and politicians in their pocket [0]) Via the article: > Fifteen months after the Colorado bill was signed into law, there is so far little evidence to support any widespread negative effects on police reten…
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#86If there is a bomb that can be dismantled by a remote operated drone with a "weapon" on it, or an armed perpetrator situation, it is kind of sadistic to make an officer go in in person instead. I can see limiting autonomous ones though.
Bomb disposal is fine by me, there’s plenty of time to get that right. Armed perpetrators should be dealt with by actual human officers, hopefully specialty trained SWAT. I don’t trust a webcam to differentiate between a hostage and a bad guy.
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#87Drone means flying drones here. What about land based robots? Can they still put a shotgun on one of those to blow away a suspicious package? Can they still use a robot to breach a door? Can they use facial recognition software on footage recovered from a land based drone?
You’ve made a bizarre slippery slope scenario here with much bigger ethical implications than the one you’re focused on.
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#88As 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)
[0] https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/07/08/485262777... [1] https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/jul/08/police-bo... [2] https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2022/12/san-francisco-decide...
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#89I 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…
1.) Progressive voters get good feelings as they think they are helping 'minorities' and advancing social justice.
2.) Politicians please a large segment of voters.
3.) People who benefit from corruption are not threatened as the status quo is maintained.
4.) Politicians's in power is not threatened by the system as the status quo is maintained.
The corrupt system only negatively impacts people who can't afford a good private lawyer.
Re: Illinois prohibits weapons, facial recognition on police drones
#90Drone means flying drones here. What about land based robots? Can they still put a shotgun on one of those to blow away a suspicious package? Can they still use a robot to breach a door? Can they use facial recognition software on footage recovered from a land based drone?
Are we equating suspicious packages with suspicious humans? You’ve made a bizarre slippery slope scenario here with much bigger ethical implications than the one you’re focused on.