the dystopian danger of police body cameras - cameras in classrooms

Police-
Wearing a human camera is a new favorite of criminal justice reform.
They were touted as a way to collect evidence of criminal investigation, to supervise and expose the abuse of police officers and to exempt them from fabricating allegations.
While the state continues to argue about how effective these body cameras are for the police, there is less focus on the emergence of other public-sector body cameras, most recently at our school.
Since Michael Brown was shot last summer by a member of the Ferguson Police Department in Missouri, at least 16 cities have introduced human camera programs.
In the past month alone, at least seven cities have started Research, launching or expanding human camera programs.
President Obama has asked Congress to spend $75 million on physical technology and training.
Recently, the Department of Justice provided the first batch of $20 million in grants.
Related report: the school noticed that mysterious planes over Baltimore raised doubts about these projects.
In Houston, Texas, 25 school officials have begun wearing body cameras in a pilot program that the school district plans to extend to all 210 members of the unit.
The spread of the body camera to our school may surprise some people, but it should not.
It is not uncommon for surveillance technology to jump from one world to another, or to be deployed to one purpose and gradually used for more purposes.
There are several examples of this story.
Local police departments have been free to use controversial new surveillance tools originally used for terrorist investigations.
These devices, known as Stingray fish, can search the location of the target phone in real time, and usually absorb the phone and location information of the onlookers in the transaction.
The police and the FBI often do not require a search warrant to use Stingray, and when they ask for the use of Stingray, these applications are often so vague and misleading that the judge may not know what they have approved
Most notably, although the money paid for Stingray often comes from the federal-
The terrorist fund is often used for election. of-the-
Mill criminal investigation
At the federal level, the fusion center is a major example of mission crawling.
Originally to make up for the lack of information.
After the 9/11 incident, the integration center should focus on preventing future terrorist attacks. Faced (thankfully)
However, due to insufficient terrorist threats, their targets were expanded to include "all dangers" and "all crimes", including the fight against bakery theft.
In fact, a stern 2012 Senate report found that not only did these centers produce "inferior, rarely timely ,[and]
Sometimes it endangers the civil liberties of citizens, but it is often not related to terrorism.
"Even the Department of Homeland Security has inadvertently strengthened the mission of the integration center to crawl: the three" success stories "of 2014 touted on the Department of Homeland Security's Web page, while cracking down on absolutely important crimes, it has nothing to do with terrorism.
Related information: The ACLU Mobile app puts police violations on the table. This history shows that for the body camera --
And other monitoring technologies.
The correct question is not, "Are we satisfied with this particular technology used for the specific government purpose Currently claimed, and specific controls have been implemented at the moment?
"On the contrary, what is more accurate and accurate is --
The far-reaching question is, "Once this technology is introduced, what do we think about other uses that may be generated?
"For body cameras, it is clear that they will be introduced in more environments than law enforcement.
If they are placed on the principal, they will eventually be placed on the teacher.
If they are placed on teachers, they will eventually be placed on child care providers and then on youth ministers, etc.
The normalization of a monitoring technology will also help to speed up the normalization of other types.
In fact, the plans for Iowa and Houston are reasonable to some extent because there are already surveillance cameras in the school corridors --
So why not add the body camera to the combo?
Body cameras may do what their supporters want to do: develop a more responsible police officer while improving the behavior on both sides of the badge.
But we cannot forget that when we approve a monitoring tool for one purpose, we also approve it for many other purposes at the same time, and we will use it as part of the discussion. Rachel Levinson
Waldman is a lawyer for the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Justice Center at New York University Law School.