Us Gives Local Police a Face-Scanning App Similar to One Used by Ice Agents

The US is quickly acquiring the downsides of authoritarianism without any of the upsides: for example increased government efficiency and reduced crime.

Singapore is safer in the dead of night than New York City is in the middle of the day. (Population is smaller than NYC but bigger than LA.)

  - Singapore is authoritarian and has a low homicide rate
  - Venezuela is authoritarian and has a high homicide rate

May I ask, why there is such a focus on face scanning apps in the first place?

Aren't fingerprints way more easy to match correctly? Or is it about checking the faces with social media databases etc to see where the person is coming from?

Like the illusion of diversity at a shopping mall, with many 'competing' stores being mostly or entirely owned by the same parent corporations, I think we need to question the degree of independent decision-making at local police departments, from state troopers all the way to the college campus level.

I think some localities do a better job than others of ensuring a transparent process, either through the municipal legislative body or a police commission, of decision-making.

But it's telling that, at the end of the day, when we have an actual group of armed people in our cities, acting as though they are beholden to no laws (and even declaring as much at some times and places), our police forces are largely standing down rather than defending the populace and enforcing the laws.

I can understand a few days of wrangling with municipal legal departments over the particularities of the supremacy clause, but once it became clear that ICE was acting wildly out of scope of their duties, and violating state and local laws in the process, it became the obvious duty of local police officers to effect arrests and refer charges to local district attorneys.

What is the underlying reason that's not happening? I'm mostly an abolitionist - I believe that the economics of slavery persist through the prison system and that we can't really craft a new slavery-free system until we dispense with the notion that some people have greater law-enforcement authority than others, or the right to be more armed than others.

But it is just simply a matter that police will always fall in line with federal (or perhaps even global?) say-so, regardless of the laws? Is it a follow-the-money thing?

We've now had ICE agents kidnap US citizens, recklessly discharge firearms, invade every unit of an apartment building with no warrant (not that any warrant providing for such an invasion would be constitutional anyhow), etc. etc. - things that, if anyone else did, they'd be charged without a doubt.

How far does it go? If ICE sexually assaults someone in broad daylight, can they simply tell their employer they'd prefer not to be charged with a crime?

I'm not even sure that'd be an escalation at this point; they've already done things that are just as damaging to society.

Honestly the number of people who get arrested for nothing more than obstinately refusing to give their name is huge. Refusal is pointless since they're going to get your name after taking you in, by refusing you're just delaying the inevitable. This is one of the many little ways that the system fucks over people who don't understand the system and/or have poor impulse control or excessively stubborn attitudes, low IQ people generally.

Basically, the laws requiring people to identify themselves are a trap set to snap on low IQ people. It's a cruel status quo, it doesn't need to be this way. Arguably the best solution would be to change the laws which require people to identify themselves. The obvious counter-argument is that this would greatly inhibit catching people who have outstanding warrants.

Face scanning tech could have the effect of disarming this trap. Instead of arresting everybody who refuses to give a name, the police can get your name through an app, learn that you have no warrants, and then tell you you're free to go instead of arresting you for no reason other than your stubborn attitude.

Overall though, I disapprove of this technology for it's potential to be scaled into massive comprehensive dragnet surveillance, very similar to what is already happening with license plate detection and traffic cameras.

IANAL but I'm curious about court challenges for these facial recognition apps/systems used by law enforcement. I knew of a guy years ago that caught a DUI based on a breathalyzer. His lawyer challenged the case and got it dismissed because the breathalyzer machine wasn't properly maintained, something about testing certifications. So, is a lawyer gonna be able to challenge these facial recognition systems, and get cases dismissed because of a failed unit test? Half-joking, but I look forward to these types of challenges.

I did a lot of research into this the other day while bored, based on all the gov contracts, the stack doesn't seem that complex, NEC seem to provide very nice tooling and it seems to work well with Palantir.

Something like: [Android App – Kotlin + CameraX + ML Kit] -> [HTTPS/mTLS] -> [AWS API Gateway -> Palantir Foundry middleware] -> [NEC face match + NeoFace] -> [DHS IDENT/HART (Thales fingerprints)] -> [PostgreSQL + Splunk audit]

Here was my reading/watching:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d1PSAB3DvwY

https://uip.nec-help.com/latest-onprem/Release-Notes/Version...

https://www.milestonesys.com/technology-partner-finder/nec/n...

https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/tr/pdf/AD1018010.pdf

https://www.sita.aero/pressroom/blog/embracing-the-change-an...

"Officer, I don't consent to this unreasonable search."

I think this actually goes against the US constitution.

Let me explain why:

Law enforcement can only investigate people based on certain provisions. The typical one is of "reasonable suspicion" of a crime. This also has to be articulated, at the latest in the police report.

With a face-scanning app, people who are registered, are no longer anonymous. The cops know who they are. However had, what legal basis would they have to know who is who at all times, without suspicion of a crime? This basically bypasses protection in the legal system. It will be interesting to see whether the high court will allow it, because if so then they can also discard the last ~80 years of legislation here. So I am pretty certain that Trump will lose this one eventually. Meanwhile he achieves that the ICE gangsters will do so against "suspected migrants", which is all the MAGA base wants to achieve.

Thank you for the information from this debate. I absolutely love the fact all the debate is very researched and love the side of politics you both have.i am independent and can agree with both. I have a question if any one knows if we will have a site to see our citizens score for court? I live in Idaho and we are the first state to use AI in court houses and in court. The county in specific I reside has a brand new court house being built for the ai court and will be used to determine all aspects of criminal cases from pre trial, due process, bail and sentencing. I have seen the report from the senate over site committee on the DOGE access to every ones private information and the grave concern they had in visiting the DOGE office. DOGE HAS NOT POSTED ON THEIR SITE SINCE OCTOBER 06 2025. I wanted to ask them but have no reply to several calls and emails. Any information would be so helpful if you know. Thanks a ton.

Minority Report when?

With all the cameras in public, such as those hanging from every traffic light in America, I just assumed they already had this. Certainly private industry and retail establishments have it. Unfortunately, this latest development does not surprise me.