Comments by "Life\x27s Adventures" (@bigphillyed) on "Why You’re in a Police Lineup, Right Now | NYT Opinion" video.

I understand the privacy violations myself I am not happy they government uses facial recognition, just like when police use automatic plate readers it all violates the 4th amendment. But just as it is legal for anyone to be in public and video or photograph anything in public view, then the government has that same right. But there should be some type of waiver or consent form when any picture is taken for any type of government identification. I feel law enforcement criminal investigation photos are fair game. The next concern would be how long these photos are allowed to be stored, as in automatic license plate readers, law enforcement is only allowed to keep plate data captured for a certain amount of time. Do departments actually destroy that data, I doubt it. But if the government is going to use facial recognition their has to be a limitation and scope clearly identified, and it should not be used for criminal investigations until such time it can identify people with at least a 98% or more probability. We are still years off from the technology being that accurate. I am fine with it being used to locate a missing person, or a suspect of a crime, but not to be used for an actual investigation or legal process.
1
The government does not have nearly a fraction of the public government cameras in use by China, Japan and the UK. The issue in america with law enforcement and cameras is access to private security cameras ie in a store, a doorbell camera, etc. Police are not compelled to need a court order for most of that footage, which is wrong in my opinion. But as I said in my comment above, if citizens can take video and photos in public then the government should have that same right.
1