Police

These Mississippi Cops Want a Camera on Your Door

Real-time police spying through smart security cams is already here.

|

Smart devices and internet-connected home security cameras are an organically and voluntarily built infrastructure for mass dystopian surveillance. This is so widely acknowledged that it has tipped into joke territory. "Hey wiretap," a woman asks an Amazon smart speaker in one meme, "do you have a recipe for pancakes?"

It's funny because it's true. No, seriously: It's true. Law enforcement agencies are just as aware of the surveillance potential here as the rest of us, and they will take advantage of that potential if we do not pass laws to stop them.

A new program in Jackson, Mississippi, demonstrates the imminence of the risk. Police there have a shiny new "real-time command center" from which to surveil the local citizenry. What they don't have is funding to purchase the many thousands of surveillance cameras they'd need for city-wide coverage—there are a few, bought with a federal grant, but most of municipal cameras are too old to livestream their feeds.

So the Jackson police are working with Fusus, a company whose surveillance cameras can be bought by private parties and then linked to the city network. A "trial program with Fusus was attractive to Jackson officials because it helps save money by passing the cost of surveillance onto businesses and homeowners who purchase devices from the company," NBC reports. The command center can also pull in livestreams from other home security tech not made by Fusus ("just about any kind of camera," NBC says), like the doorbell cameras that have become a popular means of deterring and identifying porch pirates.

The goal is a budget version of the heavy CCTV coverage already in place in London and several cities in China but so far unreplicated even in America's most-surveilled places. "We'll be able to get a location, draw a circle around it, and pull up every camera within a certain radius to see if someone runs out of a building," Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba said in October. "We can follow and trace them."

The Jackson program is not unique. About two dozen police departments around the country are already working with Fusus, though some, such as the Minneapolis police, say they're doing a more limited version of the program that won't include livestreams from doorbell cameras because of privacy concerns. (Whether those scruples will endure remains to be seen. Fusus may well upsell its clients on additional features as time goes on, doorbell livestreams included.)

Meanwhile, many law enforcement organizations are availing themselves of "Neighbors by Ring," which is offered to public safety agencies (a category that also includes fire departments) as a way to retroactively request doorbell camera footage from Ring users in an area where a crime is believed to have been committed. Neighbors is a much more guarded system than the Fusus approach looks to be; it requires police to make discrete requests instead of simply getting all the footage, all the time, instantly. It also shields users' identities from police unless they choose to volunteer a video, and users are able to opt out of law enforcement requests entirely (though officers could still canvas their neighborhood to ask in person).

Hundreds of other U.S. police departments have their own camera registries through various vendors. Like Neighbors by Ring, and unlike the Fusus system, they typically function to speed the process by which police can request access to specific, recorded footage while investigating a specific allegation. It's not impossible to imagine that type of registry leading to civil liberties abuses, but the Fusus livestream arrangement is categorically different.

The Jackson program has voluntary participation, and participants must opt in. This is miles better than any variant in which people might have their video feeds monitored without knowing it or might struggle to complete an opt-out process. Yet even if opt-in never turns into opt-out or voluntary never becomes mandatory—developments which are neither technologically nor politically inconceivable—it's not difficult to see worrisome scenarios here.

"If someone says, 'We have someone breaking into our home,' and they have a doorcam, and they give us permission and have signed an agreement, we can go into their camera and actually see the person breaking in," said Deputy Police Chief Vincent Ogburn of Ocoee, Florida, where the police department is also doing a trial with Fusus. "We can have all the information we need once we get there."

This sort of instant, advance preview of ground conditions is obviously appealing for officers heading out on an urgent call. From that reality, it's a short jump to a department with limited resources deciding to prioritize calls where camera access has been granted because they believe these are situations which will be easier to resolve. And that policy—so pragmatic, so reasonable—makes it another very small jump to saying residents should install cameras and give police access if they want to be certain they'll get police service.

Jackson officials are already encouraging residents to announce their participation in the livestream program as a means of crime deterrence. Will they eventually decide nonparticipants are functionally inviting crime? If you don't opt in, do you have something to hide? What could possibly be incriminating on your doorbell camera feed? Who's coming to your house whom you don't want us to see?

So far, Fusus doesn't integrate facial recognition. That's good news, given the many problems with the technology, especially for people who are not older white men. (Jackson is predominantly black.) But it does integrate other artificial intelligence analyses, the NBC report notes, "including software that tracks people by their clothing, behavior, and car." These are all identifiers with at least as much risk of confusion as a face.

Surveillance on this scale and in this style also offers more mundane opportunities for civil liberties abuses. "If you put any neighborhood under a microscope, you're going to find illegal things to arrest people for," said Matthew Guariglia of the Electronic Frontier Foundation. "If the camera on your neighbor's porch is pointing at your front door, will they see your 19-year-old son drinking a beer on your porch? Will it see your neighbor driving home with no license plate?" 

Will it invite official scrutiny and perhaps devastating consequences for all sorts of small, harmless, and maybe even unwitting violations of our far too many laws? The answer is obviously yes.

NEXT: Trump's 46-Minute Rant About Election Fraud Crystallizes the Most Dangerous Aspects of His Personality

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. How much more are we going to take?

      1. Make 5000 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our day37 website and start getting that much needed extra income every month…TRg You’ll get trained by us, no prior experience needed…
        Find out more about it on following address—> Home Profit System

    1. “How much more are we going to take?”

      Hmmmm. The next few weeks will tell about how much either the right “we” or the left “we” will take. It could be a dud, a firecracker or a blockbuster.

      Cues “We’re Not Gonna Take It”

    2. See, this is why you wear a mask.

    3. How much more are we going to take?

      There is no limit to what you guys don't want to take but will.

  2. Don’t bend over in your short robe to get the morning paper. Officer Todd is watching. 😉

    1. If Tossifer Odd is getting his jolllies watching my backside as I do that, I’ll say its HIS problem. T’ain’t nunna my own.

      But the fact that he CAN is very disturbing.

      This penchant for LE to always wanting more and more pathways into our homes oand lives is also VERY disturbing. Sorta reminds me of the British military under General Thomas Gage having their “general warrants” to go anywher,e search anything, take whatever they want by simply calling it’military supplies” (never mind that second barrel of flour has to last your family from April when they steal/take it all the way to September when the new crop of what is in and ground. ).

      I have a strong policy here at my place. If I want a liht turned on in a room, I get upl walk over, put my hand out, and flip a mechainicalswitch on the wall or lamp. If I want the temperature in a room higher, I open up the air damper in the wood stove for a while. If I do ever put a system here, it will be closed circuit, connect with nothng, and have enough storage to store all the cameras’ feed for a couple weeks.
      Then if I come home and find something amiss, I can review the tapes and find out what happened. Then I will be the one to involve the coppers, and bring them the footage with date/time code addresses for them to examine. I WILL REMAIN in charge of what is on, and what happens at, my place. They wil not have free reign here.

      1. That’s my system. I have 14 cameras on the property, all fed to an internal system. Nothing goes to “the cloud”. As Tionico says, I review if something happened and decide if and what to send to the ah-thoritays. Offloading your personal vid feeds to someone else, well you deserve what you get.

  3. Finally, my paycheck is $ 8,500? A working 10 hours per week online. My brother’s friend had an average of 12K for several months, he work about 22 hours a week. I can not believe how easy it is, once I try to do so. This is what I do Here is More information.

    1. Stacker Review: 200+ BILLION Money-Making “Smart Pages”
      https://stacker-review.webflow.io/posts/stacker-review

  4. Welcome to left wing hell. This is what happens. You’re gonna get a lot more of this.

  5. Well, Americans voted in democrats, so – – – – – – – –

    1. From what I can tell, the republicans are no better on this point.

      1. That’s no shit – one party posing as two, and both have “we the people” in their crosshairs.

  6. So will they also scrub video of police doing illegal things if that should get caught on door cams? Or is that part of the premium upsell “additional features” package?

  7. Of course you can have access to my video recordings. Just get a warrant. What could be simpler?

    1. Hmm, we don’t have time to get a warrant, but we can get the health inspector, building inspector, tax assessor, DCS, etc. here if you don’t cooperate.

    2. Of course you can have access to my video recordings. That’s why I bought a Ring camera and signed up for Neighbors.

  8. I get paid over $90 per hour working from home with 2 kids at home. I never thought I’d be able to do it but my best friend earns over 10k a month doing this and she convinced me to try. The potential with this is endless. Heres what I’ve been doing..Here is More information.

  9. The ubiquitousness of doorbell cameras are tied to a rising level of crime and disorder, which is ignored by government in favor of smashing the poor fools who dare defend themselves from said disorder.

    If libertarians care about the end state (unlikely from what I’ve seen) they would support a crackdown on these “minor” property crimes and help make these environments an area where cameras on every home are unnecessary.

  10. Look, folks, you decide the powers that your local police has in local elections (it’s really little different from an HOA). If you don’t want your police department using security cameras, just put an end to it. If the majority of your neighbors have different preferences from you, move somewhere else.

    I have no problem with police using my or my neighbors’ Ring cameras to track down crime. Why would I? It faces a public street.

    1. Why would I? It faces a public street.”

      How about because it is the sign of a surveillance state with little proven effectiveness for good but great potential for evil and tyranny. You want to be a tool of the state?

  11. “you decide the powers that your local police has in local elections…”

    Yeah, because everyone knows you can fight city hall just by looking at all the effective resistance to lockdowns.

    1. I get paid more than $120 to $130 per hour for working online. I heard about hrz this job 3 months ago and after joining this i have earned easily $15k from this without having online working skills. This is what I do….. Just Click Here

  12. “We’ll be able to get a location, draw a circle around it, and pull up every camera within a certain radius to see if someone runs out of a building,” Mayor Chokwe Antar Lumumba said in October. “We can follow and trace them.”

    From the mayor’s Wikipedia page:

    Lumumba was endorsed by Our Revolution [Bernie Sander’s PAC] and the Working Families Party,[far-left 3rd party from New York] and ran on a progressive platform promising to make Jackson “the most radical city on the planet.”

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chokwe_Antar_Lumumba

  13. “We can have all the information we need once we get there…” …and shoot the dog.

  14. “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?… The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin’s thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If…if…We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.” ― Aleksandr I. Solzhenitsyn , The Gulag Archipelago 1918–1956

  15. Or we could just end drug prohibition and the crime rate would plummet.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.