26 ms·
What to do if a cop tries to scan your face during a traffic stop
- mlac 5y agoLet your face get scanned and settle it in court. Best case scenario anything that is found is thrown out. Or try to fight it on the street with the officer, get hit with a bunch of charges, and then you and your property get damaged and you end up settling it in court.
- kevingadd 5y agoIf they dismiss the case how are you going to get your face scan deleted from the 12 different databases they put it in?
- awb 5y agoAs a driver presumably your face is already in those databases as seen on your driver’s license.
- bonestamp2 5y agoYes, but you may not want to give the AI additional training material for it to better identify you (if it were used on a crowd of people for example).
- inter_netuser 5y agoyou don't have any pictures in the cloud at all?
- bonestamp2 5y agoSure, I do. Almost everyone in my generation does. But, this is not about us, we can't go back... it's about future generations who will be aware of the concerns about AI before they put their images on the internet. They should be able to choose if they want that. This is a powerful and potentially dangerous thing that needs to be carefully considered.
- awb 5y agoThe article recommends saying “I don’t consent to having my face scanned.” Then let the officer do whatever they want. Basically, just resist verbally, not physically. Then fight it in court. This has never been litigated but the act of verbally resisting might give you some legal grounds for recourse.
- vanusa 5y agoget hit with a bunch of charges, And perhaps in the face. Or with worse outcomes I don't need to go into detail about.
- happytoexplain 5y agoSometimes the worse outcome for oneself is necessary to demonstrate one's principles, and, when combined with others doing the same, effect a better long-term outcome for everybody in that society. Edit: Weighing the short-term, personal best outcome against the long-term, public best outcome with any kind of objectivity is usually impossible, due to the highly unpredictable nature of the latter.
- DaveExeter 5y agoI would like to have an app that I can use to scan the face of a police officer and that tells me: 1) Officers name 2) Employment history 3) Current Salary That's all public information. Not violating any officer's privacy.
- mrtesthah 5y agoCheck out the OpenOversight database project: https://openoversight.lucyparsonslabs.com/ https://openoversight.lucyparsonslabs.com/
- uhtred 5y agoI like the idea but how does one go about getting a photo of a police officer and their badge number etc without getting smashed into the sidewalk face first?
- germinalphrase 5y agoIANAL- but if you are in a public space, police officers can be photographed/videotaped for any/no reason. There is no presumption of privacy.
- Sohcahtoa82 5y agoTell that to the cop that doesn't give a shit about what's actually legal and will put you in cuffs for recording them anyways.
- sgjohnson 5y agoBut then you hit a jackpot and a 5, 6 or even a 7 figure settlement. Which will unfortunately be paid by the taxpayer.
- basementcat 5y agoOne may have to decide which is easier: scan a law enforcement officer or study leet code problems for a month.
- casralad 5y agoAbolition is the only path forward. You can't reform this.
- kevingadd 5y agoJust going to note since this sort of comment usually gets some really shallow replies: You can maintain law and order without having a bunch of unaccountable armed dudes roaming around doing whatever they want without any oversight, and reform clearly is not changing what we have into what we need. "Abolition" does not mean "so let's move to anarchy"
- surfmike 5y agoAny examples showing that’s possible? I don’t know of any society (aside from maybe some tiny islands) where you don’t have some police to maintain law and order.
- bdcravens 5y agoIt's a bit of a leap from eliminating "having a bunch of unaccountable armed dudes roaming around doing whatever they want without any oversight" to eliminating all police. A few random ideas: * fewer armed police, and being armed requires a higher level of experience/training/psych evaluation * 100% public access to all police body cam footage. * require police officers to maintain their own liability insurance, and have rates based on the a number of KPIs related to public safety and ethics
- kevingadd 5y agoI'll note that while body cam footage and citizen recordings have helped bring visibility to police misconduct, in general they don't seem to have actually fixed anything. In some cases they increase unrest because now when a police officer is acquitted for doing something, people can look at the footage and get even more upset about it. Cops also frequently disable their cams and aren't punished for it. Body cams might be an example of something that is good on paper but actually just distracts people from things that actually address a problem.
- awb 5y agoWhat’s the point of scanning a face if you can already request and do a check on someone’s driver’s license?
- nhoughto 5y agoPassengers would be one difference I suppose
- ape4 5y agoMight be someone else's driver's license.
- throwawayboise 5y agoIF they have reasonable belief that the presented license is fake or altered, maybe a facial scan is justifiable. Gets into arguing over what is "reasonable" though.
- newsbinator 5y ago"It's 2022 and I can scan faces so I will. Why wouldn't I? I'm an authority figure and it's for the public's own good."
- mistrial9 5y agoin California and I think in all US states, significant and continued corruption is decades old.. forged-copies of official IDs are sold on blackmarkets, best if copied directly from the original, right? .. this extends into the US Mail handling of the IDs after they are printed but before they arrive at the citizens' possession. It is not discussed in public- why?
- sixothree 5y agoAnother false positive that gives them invasive permissions into people's private lives. This is how they think.
- b3morales 5y agoIn some states (probably a minority) it is permitted to not have your license on your person while driving. I think you get some kind of summons to produce it as soon as possible. This is not to say that I am on board with the face scanning. Just a related point.
- jjtheblunt 5y agoIsn't "evidence in plain view" always permissible, and isn't a face in plain view (unless obscured, which would require a command to remove clothing)?
- withinboredom 5y agoI hardly think a face scan during a traffic stop counts as evidence that the infraction was committed. “Look here your honor, anyone with that face would have run a stop sign. No not the face they have, but this photo/3d scan I took!”
- uoaei 5y agoLaws regularly go obsolete because of new technologies. The issue isn't the letter of the law but the inflexibility in adjusting to new, more intrusive ways of invading privacy. That law was written at a time where it was believed humans don't have databases in their heads. That is still true, but the effect can now be simulated with a mobile device, which brings new threats to agency as a free citizen of a nation.
- inter_netuser 5y agothe inflexibility of the law? surely that's up to the interpretation of the judge?
- sixothree 5y agoIt's really a matter of creating a false positive to give the officer permission to search a car or a phone and find more incriminating evidence. End of story.
- danielmorgan 5y agoIt is always very stupid when both sides try to argue whether or not regulating brand new technology falls under right or wrong based on legislation which was likely written decades ago. It is clearly a game of intepretation based on feelings. Instead we need a system which actively recognizes and regulates new technology as it becomes available.
- jrodthree24 5y agoIt's silly to the point where I read someone defending our right to use cryptography under the second amendment. It should be part of it's own modern bill of rights or something so there is no ambiguity.
- phkahler 5y ago>> It's silly to the point where I read someone defending our right to use cryptography under the second amendment. That's really stupid. It's as bad as when the government wanted to classify cryptographic algorithms as munitions. To make the argument I think it's best to fall back to a right to privacy under the 4th amendment, and to the fact that it's just math which anyone can do.
- ehutch79 5y agoEspecially with how hard people fought to make cryptography NOT a munition.
- justaman 5y agoHasn't crime in the US trended downward for the last 50+ years? There is no justification for this. It will incite distrust in an already hated police force. This is an authoritarian regime's wet dream. Such a thing is another brick in a wall people face to get a bullet in their head. Take this brick and throw it threw a window.
- HWR_14 5y ago> Hasn't crime in the US trended downward for the last 50+ years? Mostly. There's been a sizeable blip up during the pandemic (it's unknown if that's the cause) and that's led to talking heads talking about "the greatest rise in crime in 50 years", but that's talking about the percent increase year-over-year, and it's been trending down for a while. It's still below the rates it was at in the 1990s, which was lower than the rates in the 1970's and 1980's. The analogy would be if you owned MySpace stock (I know, it's not public) since 1999. Sure, maybe it shot up 20% this year, but who cares you're still out most of your money.
- wavefunction 5y agoI would only quibble with it being sizable. In my major city property crime dropped throughout the pandemic and violent crime was down during the beginning of the pandemic but returned to a level higher than pre-pandemic times, which is still quite a bit lower than historic records.
- ochoseis 5y agoNot to be pedantic, but crime peaked in the late 80’s / early 90’s and has steadily decreased since then (apart from recent spikes). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States
- mrlonglong 5y agoIs it concidence that lead in petrol (gas in the US) was phased out during the 80s that might explain the downward trends in crime?
- learn_more 5y agoCould you simply contort your face? Could the officer prevent you from doing that?
- lhorie 5y ago> “Let’s say you are on a traffic stop and we have someone in the car who we suspect may be wanted?” Benigno asked. “How would you go about investigating somebody who you think may be trying to hide their apprehension and hide out who they are?” How does this actually work? Presumably being wanted means that there's an arrest warrant or summons issued by a judge for a specific, previously identified person. Did the police somehow lose the person the first time? Or is this some sort of James-Bond-like fantasy where one gets to scan a face and conveniently match a facial profile to some supposed well-known but elusive enemy of state from some intelligence database without any ambiguities?
- Clubber 5y ago>means that there's an arrest warrant or summons issued by a judge for a specific, previously identified person. I would imagine usually its because they skip bail or violate probation. They can issue a warrant if you don't pay a ticket, fine, etc.
- bonestamp2 5y ago> Did the police somehow lose the person the first time? They may not have had evidence to arrest them previously.
- lhorie 5y agoBut then the police somehow got said evidence after the person left, and they know the person's identity - but presumably not from the driver's licence (which would have included residential address) - and then they're hoping to stumble upon said person in a random traffic stop? When they even admit they can't realistically go after every speeder on the road? IMHO, if I had to guess at the probability of this scenario being realistically, my Occam razor sensor would say it's most likely a manufactured scenario that isn't actually grounded in reality. </two-cents>
- withinboredom 5y agoOr you get out on bail and go to Mexico instead of your trial.
- adam12 5y agoIf you are disturbed by having your picture taken by a cop, then you should probably get rid of your smart phone.
- sixothree 5y agoI think you misunderstand. It's not that they took a picture. It's that they used some vague algorithm to determine if they have permission to rifle through your private life. Or arrest you even if you haven't committed a crime.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- throwawayninja 5y agoI agree with the premise that using a google-like AI to "detect someone who looks like a criminal" is a terrible idea; but I also think that if you're out in public you shouldn't expect privacy. Loads of people think if they go shopping at wallmart it is illegal to look at them and say "Oh hi Joe, how's the family?". I'm pretty sure the universal expectation of privacy is more harmful than taking a balanced approach and interacting with reality on reality's terms. The best outcome here is for cops to get bored, ask the city to offer a tax incentive to businesses to scan for known criminal faces & report 10 seconds CCTV before + after a hit is found, and now the police have a statistic they can use for policing. The big scandal is when "known criminal faces" start to contain "just alleged that X did Y", at which point it's merely political. If you are X, wait for the arrest and sue the city when you're proven innocent.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- mLuby 5y agoWould traffic stop biometric scanning be more acceptable if the scans were provably not stored after the stop ends? Not saying I know how to do that but I wonder if it'd make a difference.
- astockwell 5y agoAmerican here, let me spoil it for you: If a cop tries to scan your face, you LET THEM. You do not move, you do not pout, you do not cover your face, you do not duck down into the car, you do not roll up your window. You LET THEM SCAN YOUR FACE. If you are feeling particularly privileged, you may gently, at-most-once, convey (ORALLY ONLY) that you do not wish to be scanned/photographed. Then you fight it like hell with the police department's grievance process, with your local courts, and with your local city/municipal council, who should have budget oversight to the police force. Headlines like this get people killed. Seriously.
- fivestarman 5y agoThe headline "what to do if a cop tries to scan your face during a traffic stop", is going to get people killed? The only recommendations in the article are to "verbally tell an officer that they do not consent to have their biometrics collected." and "People also have the legal right to record a police officer with their own phone".
- pjc50 5y ago> "People also have the legal right to record a police officer with their own phone". People have been shot dead for reaching into their center console or glovebox. So you'd better think very carefully about how you're getting your phone out.
- 908B64B197 5y ago
- inter_netuser 5y agoBesides, can't they just take you to station and take fingerprints to verify identity? Pretty sure that's an option.
- sgjohnson 5y agoDepends on the circumstances, but not really.
- neillyons 5y agoIs it a given that if you drive in the US you are going to get stopped by the police at some point?
- sixothree 5y agoAbsolutely. There are factors that make it more likely. But regardless, I don't know a single person who has _never_ been stopped by police.
- neillyons 5y agoThanks. That is the impression I'm getting from news stories coming from the US. I'm from the UK and I'd say it is the opposite. The majority of people have never been stopped by the police.
- dataflow 5y ago> I don't know a single person who has _never_ been stopped by police. I imagine you probably are acquainted with such people but you merely don't know this fact about them... unless I guess you ask "have you ever been stopped by police?" every time you introduce yourself to someone.
- graphpercolator 5y agoI would say yes from the time you get your license. Speed, roll through a stop, something until you get a ticket and have to go to "traffic school". Basically, sit through 3 or 4 hours of the most boring driver education videos imaginable. That is after sitting in court all day for the judge to send you to traffic school on a different day. I think most drivers change their behavior after this experience a few times. If you don't speed, come to a full stop at stop signs, don't run red lights and don't use your phone while driving you won't be pulled over but you will do one of those when you start. I would say every time I drive I see at least one driver doing something that would get them pulled over so for that person it is just a matter of time.
- CheezeIt 5y agoIn my experience, no. I’ve only gotten pulled over when I was pretty much asking for it. When people say they get pulled over often, I usually find stuff out like they were doing +20 on a residential road. But this is in nicer parts of the country.
- aaomidi 5y agoIf you're not white, you say yes less you turn into a statistic.
- ThePowerOfFuet 5y agoThe word you were looking for is _lest_.
- aaomidi 5y agoOh, thank you!!
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- datavirtue 5y agoHonestly, what right does an officer have to start questioning passengers or asking them for ID?
- sgjohnson 5y agoEvery right to ask. But the passengers are under no obligation whatsoever to comply.
- devoutsalsa 5y agoI do not believe this is correct. Law By Mike says passengers must comply with reasonable requests. IANAL. https://youtube.com/shorts/o_9Gu44e_Zg?feature=share https://youtube.com/shorts/o_9Gu44e_Zg?feature=share
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- kart23 5y ago> In that situation, Wessler warned police using facial recognition at a traffic stop could open themselves up to a false arrest lawsuit under the Fourth Amendment. Doesn't seem to me that a face scan would be against the fourth amendment, unless the situation in the article happens, a officer makes an arrest based solely off a face scan. In practice, it'll play out like drug dogs. A "hit" will give the officer reasonable suspicion to search the vehicle or pull the passengers out.
- purplepatrick 5y agoPretext traffic stops should not be allowed. The rest of the world gets by just fine without them (using traffic cameras and “programmatic stops” that focus on cargo trucks, DUI controls around night life areas, etc). And from what I’ve found, research supports the notion that they do more harm than good.