|
|
| Rules of the Road |
|
|
|
June 16, 2009
|
|
|
Laws, I heard once in a law school commencement address, are those wise restraints that make men free.
And so, we grant the government the power to make and enforce laws. But even the authorities need some restraints to keep us all free.
Here’s why it matters more now than before: Enforcement tools getting pretty good. Unless you’ve taken a close look at some of the video and data products out there nowadays, you might not grasp the power they give their users. With HD surveillance cameras, facilities managers and law enforcement agencies can capture more and more detail over more and more space. With storage and video analysis technology growing, governments are poised to wield the awesome power that superior information brings.
But with massive and unprecedented capability comes a whole new set of questions: Who owns these images? If Washington, D.C., really has 5,000 cameras scanning the streets, can I take a look at some of the footage if my car was stolen and I’d like to try to find it? The footage is public property, right, paid for by taxpayers and revealing no crucial government secrets, right?
Suppose it’s just a civil matter, like a divorce case; can a citizen go look at the footage to catch a cheating spouse? Can you get a subpoena for that?
How long is video stored? Who gets to see it, and why? What are the measures to make sure that video footage is not compromised, distorted or misused? Can a county commissioner facing a tough re-election have a little browse at the sheriff’s workstation to see if his opponent has done anything noteworthy on camera?
The point isn’t that government needs to scrap these tools. But for the public to accept them, they need to know that they serve a useful purpose, and that people can walk down the street and not end up on “America’s Most Humiliating Surveillance Videos of Law- Abiding Activity.”
Whatever the limits they impose on themselves, governments need to get ahead of the backlash and legislative resistance. Montana, for example, recently banned enforcement cameras after two cities contracted for such services. Those programs had to be abandoned, and that’s what happens without clear rules.
Another wise speaker once noted that it's always easier to apologize than to ask permission. Rule-benders know this, and it's up to lawmakers and policy-makers to eliminate that weasel room.
We live in a world that will always have some data leaks, corrupt politicians and rogue public employees, and we can't let a lack of legal guidance be an invitation to abuses of public trust.
|
|
|
|
|
|