Uncategorized

FAQ

by  •  • 0 Comments

 

A FAQ ABOUT PROPOSED SURVEILLANCE EQUIPMENT TRANSPARENCY LEGISLATION

Q. Why is this legislation necessary? Why isn’t the Fourth Amendment enough?

A. The short answer is that the law has not kept up with technology.

The longer answer is that our constitution, written in the 1780’s, could not have conceived of the technological capacities we now have for observation and communication. While some legal opinions have extended fourth amendment protections to include newer technologies, others have gone in the opposite direction (e.g., a recent decision, USA v Matish, said that you have no reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to your home computer if it is connected to the Internet!).

We have the very real possibility of soon living in a society far beyond what even George Orwell imagined – where we will be tracked whenever we leave our house through facial recognition integrated with surveillance cameras; where everything we do online will be cataloged, stored and run through algorithms for “thought crime” analysis, and where our  conversations may be overheard and analyzed – even in our own homes if we choose to use voice-enabled gadgets. These things are all well within our technological capability today, and who knows what will be possible in five or ten years?

Read more →

Transparency Ordinance

Oakland Poised To Protect Civil Liberties

by  •  • 1 Comment

Update 5-10-17: Oakland’s Public Safety Committee voted unanimously on May 9 to support the Surveillance Technology Ordinance. Thanks largely to your letters, calls and emails. 

My guest piece in the East Bay Express, on why Oakland needs to adopt a proposed Surveillance Technology Ordinance – here.

For background on how this conversation started, and how three different entities (Oakland, Seattle, and San Diego) have approached surveillance reform, UC Berkeley Law Professor Catherine Crump’s excellent law review article can be read and downloaded here.

Join us on May 9 at 6pm before the Public Safety Committee, as the ordinance gets its first review by the council.

Transparency Ordinance

Oakland: Rise Up Against Secret Surveillance

by  •  • 0 Comments

Oakland’s Public Safety Committee will vote on the ordinance on May 9 at 6pm at City Hall at Oscar Grant Plaza. We need you there. 

**

(Reprinted from the ACLU of Northern California)

Everyone deserves to feel safe in their community. Sometimes, that means policing the police. Shouldn’t you have a say in deciding whether local law enforcement gets to deploy futuristic surveillance technology in your community?

The Oakland Police Department has the capability to spy on Oakland residents using surveillance cameras, automatic license plate readers, a ‘Stingray’ cellphone tracker, and social media monitoring software. Upwards of $2.5 million has been spent on these devices, which are capable of collecting data that can be shared with the federal government.

Use this form to ask the Oakland City Council to vote “YES” on the Surveillance Technology Ordinance. 

Read more →

Transparency Ordinance

City of Providence Set to Pass Wide Ranging Community Safety Act Ordinance

by  •  • 0 Comments

On June 1, The Providence City Council voted 13-1 to adopt the Providence Community-Police Relations Act. 

 

Key Points of the CSA

Prohibition on racial profiling and other forms of profiling

Police cannot use race, ethnicity, color, national origin, language, gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, political affiliation, religion, physical or mental disability, or serious medical condition as a reason to suspect someone of a crime.

Standardized Encounter Form

Every time police stop someone, they must fill out a card with race, gender, and age of the person stopped; reason for the stop; if there was a search, and the results of the search; how long the stop lasted; results of the stop (ticket, arrest, nothing); and officer’s name and badge number. They must provide a copy of the form to the person who was stopped.

Read more →

Police Militarization, UASI

Berkeley Should Not Participate In The Militarized Police Aspects Of Urban Shield

by  •  • 0 Comments

Update: On May 16, the Stop Urban Shield Coalition shut down the Berkeley City Council meeting at 12:45am (actually on May 17). New special meeting to be scheduled. It will be on June 20 at 6:00pm at Longfellow Middle School at 1500 Derby Street. 

BERKELEY SHOULD NOT PARTICIPATE IN THE MILITARIZED-POLICE ASPECTS OF URBAN SHIELD

Urban Shield has been staged yearly in Alameda County since 2007. The grant money to manage it flows from the Department of Homeland ultimately to the Alameda County Sheriff who is responsible for all aspects of the extravaganza. The terms of the grant money stipulate that everything associated with UASI (and hence Urban Shield) must have “a nexus to terrorism” – an important criticism.

Urban Shield has three parts: A weapons and equipment expo, a set of presentations, seminars and talks, much like other conventions, and a set of training exercises.  Some of the training exercises are for non-police emergency responders, while others, the ones most objected to, are for police department SWAT teams. These SWAT teams, from around the Bay, the country and the world compete for points as they move from scenario to scenario.

Read more →