I don't understand why so many cities and other jurisdictions are trying to ban facial recognition. It's a tool, like anything else. We make policing easier by

I don't understand why so many cities and other jurisdictions are trying to ban facial recognition. It's a tool, like anything else. We make policing easier by letting the police department have access to plumbed city water, electricity, computers, cars, and so on. Facial recognition is a way for them to work more efficiently and effectively. In Seattle, we've had rampant property crime to the point where people don't even bother reporting a lot of it anymore because the insurance deductibles and lack of consequences for thieves makes the effort a depressing waste of time. Unfortunately, without deterrents, most people expect crime will continue and likely get worse. This isn't the fault of the police department - Seattle has less than half the number of active officers per capita compared to other large US cities. So they can't afford to investigate property crimes, let alone locate suspects and bring them to justice. Having facial recognition as an available tool would help with that. It means the police can be dispatched to the location of a suspect and bring them to justice, instead of letting them continue consequence-free, or relying on dumb luck to stumble upon a suspect. False positive matches can be mitigated trivially by having a human in the loop. Does that mean the overall matching process is perfect? No, but it never can be, and perfect is the enemy of good. We need deterrents to crime and real consequences if we want to ensure a safe society, which is the most basic expectation taxpayers have. If facial recognition is regulated, I hope they don't go overboard, like requiring evidence of a crime (through surveillance footage) to run a search, or something to that effect.