Praise for Oakland’s Proposed Surveillance Equipment Regulation Ordinance!


Passed out of the Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission on Thursday, Jan 5th, 2017, the proposed Surveillance Equipment Regulation legislation (OPAC-Surveillance-Ordinance-Adopted – PDF) received praise from a number of people involved in civil liberties work. Here are some quotes and statements of support taken from tweets:

“Oakland’s surveillance ordinance is good example for local govs to protect civil liberties.” – Professor of Law Catherine Crump, University of California at Berkeley (testifying, right)

“It’s never been more essential for communities to say no to secret & discriminatory surveillance.Oakland took important step tonight.” – Nicole Ozer, Policy Director, ACLU of California

“This proposal achieves the goal of formalizing privacy values” – Nuola O’Connor, Center for Democracy and Progress


Killer Cop Training – Coming Soon To Northern California



(Send a note to the Folsom Police Department and the Folsom City Council objecting to the municipal sponsorship of Calibre killer cop trainings). 

Mother Jones profiles Calibre instructor Dave Grossman: “Are You Prepared to Kill Somebody?” A Day With One of America’s Most Popular Police Trainers; The dark vision of “killology” expert Dave Grossman.


by J.P. Massar

Jeronimo Yanez, the officer who shot Philando Castile in his car in Minnesota took a training course called “The Bulletproof Warrior,” now renamed as the “Street Survival Seminar.”

The evidence suggests that this course, and courses similar to it, offered by a private company called Calibre Press, are even worse than Urban Shield – the organized para-military and terror response training put on for police by the Alameda County Sheriff’s Department – if that’s imaginable.



BART must be open about how its spies on its riders…


Image result for bart surveillanceAn op-ed appeared in the December 12th edition of the East Bay Times, authored by former Oakland City Councilperson Wilson Riles, regarding the surveillance equipment regulation ordinance now being created by the BART Board and its staff in consultation with the ACLU and Oakland Privacy. It begins:

In the aftermath of the election, many have come to understand a powerful surveillance state in the hands of the federal government, especially one that will have a CIA director who believes: “Legal and bureaucratic impediments to surveillance should be removed” is a serious danger to the freedoms of all Americans.

Surveillance in the Bay Area must be carefully weighed against our civil liberties, and having data fed into federal databases, to be used to target our Muslim and undocumented neighbors, is something we cannot continue to allow…

Read the whole thing here.


A Letter to the President on Surveillance Tech


By Eric Neville, Oakland Privacy Member.

Dear President Obama:

I question the legitimacy of using any secret technology in attempt to uphold the law.  As an illustration of the inherent vitiation of the legal process, I offer the Stingray cell site simulator equipment, and I reference the issues addressed in the attached letter from twelve United States Senators.[1a][1b]  I must immediately point out that even the name of this technology may be disputed, having been referred to even in courts by various “inscrutable euphemisms“, showing from the first step impedance to the proper understanding which is necessary for justice.[1c]


Trump will soon be in charge of our surveillance apparatus – what can we do?



Oakland Privacy member and Oakland Privacy Advisory Commission Chair Brian Hofer’s guest essay discussing President-Elect Donald Trump being handed the keys to the surveillance kingdom in this week’s East Bay Express.

Catherine Crump, Professor at UC Berkeley, writes about local control over surveillance technology: Citizens need more say over police surveillance technology.