San Francisco just banned facial-recognition technology

[Ray From Cleveland]

The ban is part of a broader anti-surveillance ordinance that the city’s Board of Supervisors approved on Tuesday. Eight of the board’s 11 supervisors voted in favor of it. The ordinance, which outlaws the use of facial-recognition technology by police and other government departments, could also spur other local governments to take similar action.

Facial-recognition systems are increasingly used everywhere from police departments to rock concerts to homes, stores and schools. They are designed to identify specific people from live video feeds, recorded video footage or still photos, often by comparing their features with a set of faces (such as mugshots).

“We all support good policing but none of us want to live in a police state,” San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who introduced the bill earlier this year, told CNN Business ahead of the vote.

San Francisco just banned facial-recognition technology

We all support good policing, but none of us want a police state? Are these the same people who said you must have health insurance or else? The same people that want to tell you how many rounds your gun magazine can have? The same people who told us what kind of guns we are allowed to own? The same people that tax citizens into submission if they smoke cigarettes? The same people who limited choices of food in public schools? Now that we have technology to identify criminals and threats, they don't want a police state.

Yes, facial identification technology can be used to recognize trouble makers, but it can also be used to identify previously deported illegal aliens. Gee, I bet that's something they never even thought of!

 

[fncceo]

A guy (or gal) is arrested for an offense. They don't have any ID on them and they give the name of a friend or relative. They know that person so they can rattle off their address, phone number, and birthdate. They have a superficial resemblance to that person and so it's not possible to confirm ID.

The problem is, if that person is charged, the friend or relative will be charged, and will have to prove they didn't commit the offense.

Or, and this happens, the person giving false details doesn't his friend or relative has a warrant out of his arrest. Now the person giving false details is being charged with the offense of his friend or relative.

Facial recognition used by police during the booking process makes sure the right person gets charged, or not, with the offense, even when they lie about their identity.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The ban is part of a broader anti-surveillance ordinance that the city’s Board of Supervisors approved on Tuesday. Eight of the board’s 11 supervisors voted in favor of it. The ordinance, which outlaws the use of facial-recognition technology by police and other government departments, could also spur other local governments to take similar action.

Facial-recognition systems are increasingly used everywhere from police departments to rock concerts to homes, stores and schools. They are designed to identify specific people from live video feeds, recorded video footage or still photos, often by comparing their features with a set of faces (such as mugshots).

“We all support good policing but none of us want to live in a police state,” San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who introduced the bill earlier this year, told CNN Business ahead of the vote.

San Francisco just banned facial-recognition technology

We all support good policing, but none of us want a police state? Are these the same people who said you must have health insurance or else? The same people that want to tell you how many rounds your gun magazine can have? The same people who told us what kind of guns we are allowed to own? The same people that tax citizens into submission if they smoke cigarettes? The same people who limited choices of food in public schools? Now that we have technology to identify criminals and threats, they don't want a police state.

Yes, facial identification technology can be used to recognize trouble makers, but it can also be used to identify previously deported illegal aliens. Gee, I bet that's something they never even thought of!

If you’re an illegal and/or outlaw you have no reason to not live and poop in San Francisco.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

SanFran is a Dem stronghold aka fascist state....that they would not embrace facial recog tech just screams "we have something to hide" !!!

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

SanFran is a Dem stronghold aka fascist state....that they would not embrace facial recog tech just screams "we have something to hide" !!!

Democrats don't like things that would provide positive results such as facial technology or border fences. That's what really scares them.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A guy (or gal) is arrested for an offense. They don't have any ID on them and they give the name of a friend or relative. They know that person so they can rattle off their address, phone number, and birthdate. They have a superficial resemblance to that person and so it's not possible to confirm ID.

The problem is, if that person is charged, the friend or relative will be charged, and will have to prove they didn't commit the offense.

Or, and this happens, the person giving false details doesn't his friend or relative has a warrant out of his arrest. Now the person giving false details is being charged with the offense of his friend or relative.

Facial recognition used by police during the booking process makes sure the right person gets charged, or not, with the offense, even when they lie about their identity.

Absolutely. I don't know how many times you've run into that in your profession, but I listen to our police scanner here. It's like suspects are constantly giving false information or refusing to identify themselves at all. Facial technology would eliminate those problems for law enforcement. I guess that's why SF is so against it.

 

[fncceo]

A guy (or gal) is arrested for an offense. They don't have any ID on them and they give the name of a friend or relative. They know that person so they can rattle off their address, phone number, and birthdate. They have a superficial resemblance to that person and so it's not possible to confirm ID.

The problem is, if that person is charged, the friend or relative will be charged, and will have to prove they didn't commit the offense.

Or, and this happens, the person giving false details doesn't his friend or relative has a warrant out of his arrest. Now the person giving false details is being charged with the offense of his friend or relative.

Facial recognition used by police during the booking process makes sure the right person gets charged, or not, with the offense, even when they lie about their identity.

Absolutely. I don't know how many times you've run into that in your profession, but I listen to our police scanner here. It's like suspects are constantly giving false information or refusing to identify themselves at all. Facial technology would eliminate those problems for law enforcement. I guess that's why SF is so against it.

It doesn't eliminate all the problems. The person arrested must have a police photograph on file where identity has previously been confirmed.

But, it does prove useful in a lot of false identity situations.

 

[Thinker101]

The ban is part of a broader anti-surveillance ordinance that the city’s Board of Supervisors approved on Tuesday. Eight of the board’s 11 supervisors voted in favor of it. The ordinance, which outlaws the use of facial-recognition technology by police and other government departments, could also spur other local governments to take similar action.

Facial-recognition systems are increasingly used everywhere from police departments to rock concerts to homes, stores and schools. They are designed to identify specific people from live video feeds, recorded video footage or still photos, often by comparing their features with a set of faces (such as mugshots).

“We all support good policing but none of us want to live in a police state,” San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who introduced the bill earlier this year, told CNN Business ahead of the vote.

San Francisco just banned facial-recognition technology

We all support good policing, but none of us want a police state? Are these the same people who said you must have health insurance or else? The same people that want to tell you how many rounds your gun magazine can have? The same people who told us what kind of guns we are allowed to own? The same people that tax citizens into submission if they smoke cigarettes? The same people who limited choices of food in public schools? Now that we have technology to identify criminals and threats, they don't want a police state.

Yes, facial identification technology can be used to recognize trouble makers, but it can also be used to identify previously deported illegal aliens. Gee, I bet that's something they never even thought of!

Yep, they should be implementing fecal identification technology.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

A guy (or gal) is arrested for an offense. They don't have any ID on them and they give the name of a friend or relative. They know that person so they can rattle off their address, phone number, and birthdate. They have a superficial resemblance to that person and so it's not possible to confirm ID.

The problem is, if that person is charged, the friend or relative will be charged, and will have to prove they didn't commit the offense.

Or, and this happens, the person giving false details doesn't his friend or relative has a warrant out of his arrest. Now the person giving false details is being charged with the offense of his friend or relative.

Facial recognition used by police during the booking process makes sure the right person gets charged, or not, with the offense, even when they lie about their identity.

Absolutely. I don't know how many times you've run into that in your profession, but I listen to our police scanner here. It's like suspects are constantly giving false information or refusing to identify themselves at all. Facial technology would eliminate those problems for law enforcement. I guess that's why SF is so against it.

It doesn't eliminate all the problems. The person arrested must have a police photograph on file where identity has previously been confirmed.

But, it does prove useful in a lot of false identity situations.

True, but I would assume you came across a lot of repeat offenders who did have their photo on file. After all, there is no reason to lie about who you are unless authorities know who you are in the first place.

 

[skye]

San Francisco should ban people defecating on the streets!


Then....they can move on to ban face recognition technology.

Total morons.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Did everyone wear out their fingertips on keyboards and smartphones? I think finger printing technology has been brought into the 21'st century hasn't it? I think facial recognition was to enhance identification... The Government has taken my fingerprints several times... Been sometime since the last time I was fingerprinted but I bet their the same... Now my face has changed quite a bit... I am much better looking now than I was 40 years ago....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

San Francisco should ban people defecating on the streets!


Then....they can move on to ban face recognition technology.

Total morons.

The funny thing is these are the very same people that want to run the entire country.

 

[LeeOnLido]

isnt facial recognition racist?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

The ban is part of a broader anti-surveillance ordinance that the city’s Board of Supervisors approved on Tuesday. Eight of the board’s 11 supervisors voted in favor of it. The ordinance, which outlaws the use of facial-recognition technology by police and other government departments, could also spur other local governments to take similar action.

Facial-recognition systems are increasingly used everywhere from police departments to rock concerts to homes, stores and schools. They are designed to identify specific people from live video feeds, recorded video footage or still photos, often by comparing their features with a set of faces (such as mugshots).

“We all support good policing but none of us want to live in a police state,” San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who introduced the bill earlier this year, told CNN Business ahead of the vote.

San Francisco just banned facial-recognition technology

We all support good policing, but none of us want a police state? Are these the same people who said you must have health insurance or else? The same people that want to tell you how many rounds your gun magazine can have? The same people who told us what kind of guns we are allowed to own? The same people that tax citizens into submission if they smoke cigarettes? The same people who limited choices of food in public schools? Now that we have technology to identify criminals and threats, they don't want a police state.

Yes, facial identification technology can be used to recognize trouble makers, but it can also be used to identify previously deported illegal aliens. Gee, I bet that's something they never even thought of!

The world must be ending.

I agree with San Fransicko on this one.

Who are you and what have you don with the communist left city?

.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

We all support good policing, but none of us want a police state? Are these the same people who said you must have health insurance or else? The same people that want to tell you how many rounds your gun magazine can have? The same people who told us what kind of guns we are allowed to own? The same people that tax citizens into submission if they smoke cigarettes? The same people who limited choices of food in public schools? Now that we have technology to identify criminals and threats, they don't want a police state.

Yes, facial identification technology can be used to recognize trouble makers, but it can also be used to identify previously deported illegal aliens. Gee, I bet that's something they never even thought of!

Another "small government" conservative opposing smaller government. Color me shocked.......

 

[buttercup]

The ban is part of a broader anti-surveillance ordinance that the city’s Board of Supervisors approved on Tuesday. Eight of the board’s 11 supervisors voted in favor of it. The ordinance, which outlaws the use of facial-recognition technology by police and other government departments, could also spur other local governments to take similar action.

Facial-recognition systems are increasingly used everywhere from police departments to rock concerts to homes, stores and schools. They are designed to identify specific people from live video feeds, recorded video footage or still photos, often by comparing their features with a set of faces (such as mugshots).

“We all support good policing but none of us want to live in a police state,” San Francisco Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who introduced the bill earlier this year, told CNN Business ahead of the vote.

San Francisco just banned facial-recognition technology

We all support good policing, but none of us want a police state? Are these the same people who said you must have health insurance or else? The same people that want to tell you how many rounds your gun magazine can have? The same people who told us what kind of guns we are allowed to own? The same people that tax citizens into submission if they smoke cigarettes? The same people who limited choices of food in public schools? Now that we have technology to identify criminals and threats, they don't want a police state.

Yes, facial identification technology can be used to recognize trouble makers, but it can also be used to identify previously deported illegal aliens. Gee, I bet that's something they never even thought of!

The world must be ending.

I agree with San Fransicko on this one.

Who are you and what have you don with the communist left city?

.

Right? It was super surprising to me too. Disappointing to see 'conservatives' going along with it.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The world must be ending.

I agree with San Fransicko on this one.

Who are you and what have you don with the communist left city?

I believe this point has been made all ready, but I will try to reinforce it...

Any illegal alien that has be processed by a Government agency will have their face stored on the "master list"... This may not be exactly what the politburo in San Fran deems safe for the future voters...

Not one person said diddly squat about fingerprints... Did that technology go by the wayside?
Enquiring minds want to know...

 

[007]

San FranQueerco has obviously GIVEN UP on trying to enforce any kind of LAW when it comes to ILLEGAL ALIENS, TWEAKERS, HOMELESS, etc... the problem they have created with their SANCTUARY CITY stupidity is now biting them in the ass, BIG TIME, and that goes for PORTLAND, SEATTLE, many of the TOILET cities on the LEFT COAST. There's more SHIT, PISS, NEEDLES, HOMELESS and FILTHY DISEASES now there in the streets than anything else.

SUFFER... they created it... let them SUFFER in it now.

 

[007]

I wouldn't be completely surprised if California actually voted for TRUMP in 2020. People there are getting FED UP.

 

[fncceo]

The world must be ending.

I agree with San Fransicko on this one.

Who are you and what have you don with the communist left city?

I believe this point has been made all ready, but I will try to reinforce it...

Any illegal alien that has be processed by a Government agency will have their face stored on the "master list"... This may not be exactly what the politburo in San Fran deems safe for the future voters...

Not one person said diddly squat about fingerprints... Did that technology go by the wayside?
Enquiring minds want to know...

Unlike what you see on TV. Getting an ID from prints can take days. A routine request can take a week or more to process.

Facial recognition is almost instantaneous.