Reference no: EM133787705

Assignment:

Read these two comments say why you agree and ask some questions to make the discussion flows

POST 1

For this discussion I will be using a case that happened in 2020 where the FBI conducted what they call a "batch query" on 133 individuals that were arrested during a BLM protest demonstration. Typically, this surveillance is used under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which means typically this is done to foreign individuals, not citizens of the United States. In this case, surveillance was used because there was, what the FBI believes, reasonable suspicion that the protests had ties to terrorism. For my supporting argument, this surveillance was done in efforts to identify potential threats amidst the protests. The FBI's main goal was to ensure public safety by identifying and neutralizing potential threats quickly and efficiently as possible. The dissent against this surveillance is that Section 702 is intended for foreign threats, not domestic protesters exercising their first amendment rights. The use of these tools on U.S citizens raises a concern about racial profiling and government overreach.

This misuse of surveillance provides a sense of distrust in law enforcements and undermines the legitimacy of government institutions. Some recommendations for this case are to implement stricter guidelines and oversight to prevent any misuse of foreign surveillance tools against domestic protesters. Additionally, I believe that having audits should be conducted to ensure any surveillance conducted is lawful, necessary, and appropriate. It was also stated that the FBI had the query conducted had a lack of understanding and received remedial training. I believe that having regularly scheduled training to understand the importance of using such strong tools would help a little bit.

-Tommy

POST 2

Incident: The Use of Facial Recognition Technology by Law Enforcement

They argue that the extensive application of Facial Recognition Technology (FRT), by law enforcement is seen as a type of surveillance, where individuals are monitored and tracked without their permission. This can have an impact on freedom of expression and movement. Another concern is the issue of accuracy with studies indicating that FRT can exhibit error rates among demographics, especially individuals belonging to minority groups such as people of color, women and young people. This could potentially lead to arrests, discriminatory profiling and a decline in trust towards law enforcement. Critics also warn about the possibility of FRT being misused beyond its purpose potentially being used for activities that violate rights like targeting peaceful demonstrators or monitoring individuals, for minor offenses.

Furthermore there needs to be an organization, for overseeing the proper implementation of Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) ensuring that it is used fairly and does not disproportionately impact specific communities. It is crucial to engage in consultations and gather input to ensure that the use of FRT aligns with values and respects fundamental rights. Moreover a focus should be placed on enhancing the accuracy of FRT to minimize errors and discrimination risks while also introducing protections to prevent misuse.