Re: Automated DB searches and the 1st
At 09:13 AM 7/2/01 -0500, Jim Choate wrote:
Amendment IV
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
I contend that to run an automated search on a face taken by a surveillance camera requires probable cause on each of the faces searched. That there might be a criminal in a crowd is not sufficient probable cause to run searches on all persons in the crowd. It violates their 'personal security'.
The counter to this perspective is that its been considered 'reasonable' to look at someone's face (in the optical) for a long time. It is not considered 'reasonable' (ergo, not constitutional in the US) to ask folks to remove their camoflage and attire, so the IVth protects citizens. Wear the groucho glasses as a protest. Whether active or passive observation using extra-optical radiation is a 'search' is currently a hot topic. (Passive, and typically civilian, observation includes checking out folks' underwear using IR sensitive cameras; Pol/mil observation includes active mm & xray irradiation and reception, and the recently disallowed passive IR observation of homes.) Would face-surveillance cams that snarfed IR and got your facial blood vessel patterns be unreasonably searching?
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001, David Honig wrote:
The counter to this perspective is that its been considered 'reasonable' to look at someone's face (in the optical) for a long time. It is not considered 'reasonable' (ergo, not constitutional in the US) to ask folks to remove their camoflage and attire, so the IVth protects citizens. Wear the groucho glasses as a protest.
It is only 'reasonable' if you have probably cause. Let's take the example of the cop standing on the corner with a photograph (obstensibly the same as computer searches). That photo is of a particular person who has particular characteristics. Let's assume for the sake of argument that the person in the photo is a white, blonde, male. The police officer isn't going to stop blacks, hispanics, women, children, etc. However, the automated system does exactly this. They are not searching for a 'particular person' as required by the 4th, they are searching everyone for instances in the police records. Clearly non-conformal to the wording of the 4th. -- ____________________________________________________________________ Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent. Ludwig Wittgenstein The Armadillo Group ,::////;::-. James Choate Austin, Tx /:'///// ``::>/|/ ravage@ssz.com www.ssz.com .', |||| `/( e\ 512-451-7087 -====~~mm-'`-```-mm --'- --------------------------------------------------------------------
participants (2)
-
David Honig -
Jim Choate