This is a discussion on Goodbye Facial Recognition within the Off Topic & Humor Discussion forums, part of the The Back Porch category; I think this discussion has gone sideways regarding the whole "stop and ID" issue. So, can we all agree that some estates are Stop and ...
I think this discussion has gone sideways regarding the whole "stop and ID" issue. So, can we all agree that some estates are Stop and ID and others are not? Plus, even in Stop and ID states, there is a requirement that the police have cause to detain the person in the first place.
So, the question is, would using lasers to identify people based on their heartbeat be considered contrary to a persons right to not identify themselves. Well, using facial recognition is not considered a violation of that right because there is no expectation of privacy when in public. So, using a person "face" for identification (to my knowledge) has not been ruled a violation of citizens' rights. But, using a laser to identify someone is definitely a new wrinkle. While they may be in public, their heartbeat is "concealed" much like the ID in their wallet is concealed. If there was technology to "read" a persons ID within their clothing or wallet I would think it would go against the whole basis of the right to not IDing. The fact that there isn't "yet" a database of everyone's heartbeat doesn't mean squat. The government has unlimited resources and could easily start compiling such a database. For example, you have to provide ID at many government offices (e.g. DMV) where they could implement scanners and match up the heartbeats to individuals. So, my opinion, is that the use of such technology could be deemed unconstitutional because one's heartbeat is not something that is considered "exposed" while in public. Plus, you add that detecting a person's heartbeat would also give away certain medical conditions, that is not a road I wish my government to go down.
I was fingerprinted when I went to work in a group home for kids.
I was fingerprinted when I became security guard
I was fingerprinted when I got my CHP and every time I renew it.
I was fingerprinted when I volunteered for the security team at my church.
Just because you're in the system doesn't make you a criminal
Let me recap why I am passionate about this (and I did give a brief description before in another thread):
I was running one day and two LEO stopped me. There was a break in in the neighborhood. They asked for my ID and I said no. One LEO insisted I had to even when detained. I told him no, get a supervisor. The sad thing is his buddy knew the whole time I was right and most likely this guy. While we are waiting for the supervisor they tried to "chit chat" with me. One does not have to have been to SERE school to recognize an interrogation.
One guy asked "so, where do you start your runs from?" "Where are you running to?" "What time did you start your run this morning". I knew what they were doing, trying to establish whereabouts for more "ammo".
That is why I do not answer questions.
Again, I have ZERO respect for people that abuse or break the law.
I surely hope there is a difference between the "Our facial recognition system says that man is Oldvet so we need to stop and ID him" (since they already know my ID) and the "Our facial recognition system says that man is Oldvet, wanted in 48 states for various felonies, so we have cause to stop and ID him."
Otherwise, it's just more privacy abuse.
Retired USAF E-8. Curmudgeon on the loose.
Lighten up and enjoy life because:
Paranoia strikes deep, into your life it will creep. It starts when you're always afraid... Buffalo Springfield - For What It's Worth
The technology, per se, is new. The technique...the use of lasers is not. Your heartbeat, name, birth date, place of residence, almost everything but your appearance is already "hidden" from plain sight. The ability of government to know that data is a long established legal reality. However the government cannot collect fingerprints, photographs, and other information for the whole population without permission.For example, you have to provide ID at many government offices (e.g. DMV) where they could implement scanners and match up the heartbeats to individuals. So, my opinion, is that the use of such technology could be deemed unconstitutional because one's heartbeat is not something that is considered "exposed" while in public.
Ugh...no not medical information. It isn't that easy to diagnose a medical condition with anything less than an EKG. The device collects vibrations from a beating heart, not medically usable diagnostic information from the electrical activity of the heart.Plus, you add that detecting a person's heartbeat would also give away certain medical conditions, that is not a road I wish my government to go down.
The bottom line is that at present, this technology is in the hands of the DOD - not civilians. I imagine the technique is rather a closely guarded secret.
"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits."
"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms." - Thomas Jefferson
A man has got to know his limitations.
In a world of snowflakes, be a torch.
Let me ask you: For the police to demand I show ID, is that a legal request under that circumstance or not? It is a yes or no answer.