What is Facial Recognition?
Facial recognition technology provides a sophisticated surveillance technique based on trained ML models that can be more accurate than the human eye. With the help of it public safety is best to increase and improve as it gives easy allowances to track down person.
But Wait, Do you think USA Government is too intervening in your Privacy?
Democrats Legislation in Headlines
Here we will discuss all these issue, but wait there something you need to know, that what currently legislation/bill will be introduced in U.S. House of Representatives and The Senate.
Here we will discuss all these issue, but wait there something you need to know, that what currently legislation/bill will be introduced in U.S. House of Representatives and The Senate. Four Democrats in Congress announced this Thursday (25 June, 2020) that they will introduce legislation/bill to effectively ban the government use of the facial recognition technology.
On Thursday, in a move cheered by civil liberties advocates, a string-quartet of progressives(Democrats) in Congress announce that they’re going to introduce sweeping legislation. The legislation is to effectively ban government use of face recognition and other bio metric technology nationwide, adduce threats to privacy rights of citizen of U.S. and therefore the well-established flaws of such tools. Advocacy Groups like The ACLU, Color of Change, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Fight for the Future are backing the bill.
Views of Evan Greer
Evan Greer, Deputy Director of Fight for the Future, said that for tyranny, facial technology perfect technology. It automatically is discrimination in policing and exacerbates existing injustices in our deeply racist criminal justice system. She added and said that this is exactly, what is needed. In continuation said that Congress should pass the bill ASAP. And she demanded as soon this bill passes, move quickly to pass legislation that also bans using facial recognition for surveillance purposes in corporations, schools, and other private institutions.
According to her facial recognition is like a nuclear or biological weapon. She doesn’t means to amend the act as it is inherently oppressive technology.
Statement of Legislation by Ed Marky’s(Senator) Office
The statements from his office were outlined as:
• Prohibiting the use of facial recognition technology by federal entities/authorities, which can only be lifted with an act of Congress.
• Prohibiting the utilization of other biometric technologies also, which incorporates voice & gate recognition and recognition of other entrenched physical characteristics, by federal entities/authorities, which may only be lifted with an act of Congress.
• Condition the federal grant funding to state and local entities, including enforcement of law, on those authorities enacting their own moratoria on the utilization of facial recognition and biometric technology.
• Prohibiting the use of federal dollars for bio metric surveillance systems.
• Prohibiting the use of information collected via biometric technology in violation of the Act in any judicial proceedings.
• Includes a private right of action of law for individuals whose bio metric data is used in violation of the Act and allows for enforcement by state Attorneys General and the authorities.
• Allow states and localities to enact their own laws regarding the use of facial recognition and biometric technologies but keeping the legislation in mind.
The Origin of the Legislation
The proposal of abolishing the law came after one month after the alleged killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis police, which sparked the nation wave of riots and demonstration demanding the racial justice.
Detroit police arrested Robert Williams, a Michigan man in January after stateowned face recognition software misidentified him as a shoplifting suspect. It was referenced in the continued protests in an op-ed about his experience published Wednesday within the Washington Post.
Adding on ACLU of Michigan senior staff attorney Philip Mayor, who alongside Victoria Burton-Harris of McCaskey Law, PLC, is representing Williams and filed an administrative complaint Wednesday against the Detroit local police department over the incident.
Though ACLU senior legislative Counsel Neema Singh Guliani said that no should worry about government being tracking and identifying their face wherever they go. She added that she welcomes the new bill and it should immediately pass.
The Public Worries
So many queries are coming up on different platforms like:
i. Will iPhone be illegal….?
A. This legislation is only to ban government authorities to use it.
ii. If it bans, that means government will use it but anonymously?
A. This is similarly arguing about a situation where CANCER HOSPITAL is owned by TOBACCO PRODUCER AND DISRIBUTOR.
This is a situation where the Senators are right that it is a breach of privacy of all the residents of the United States of America. Like the data of millions users as sources said that HACKERS leaked SENSITIVE FILES of 200 police departments, that can be traversed or searched just by batch numbers.
On the other hand, it has made government of US to track down crimes as fast as possible and decrease a crime rates. As facial recognition is inherently oppressive technology. A perfectly described In a song
“This is America” by Childish Gambino clearly states in lyrics – “This is America Don’t catch you slipping’ now Don’t catch you slipping’ now Look what I’m whipping’ now This is America Police be tripping’ now (woo) Yeah, this is America (woo, ayy)”
So the Bill has its own Pros and Cons to be considered by government.
Bill Can be passed as :
A bill must need to pass both houses of Congress, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES & THE SENATORS, before it goes to the President for consideration. President can use his/her veto, can resend it for reconsideration, though Congress can pass the bill by 2/3rd majority after president used his veto to pass the bill indistinctly.
The News has got into headlines with “This Bill Should Immediately Pass”. So it is clear to be in motion in both the houses, and whatever the majority decides will be in favor of public Privacy.