Within the last couple months, our area has installed the controversial ALPR cameras throughout the area. Much public outcry has arisen from this shocking measure taken for “our safety” and many see them as a fundamental threat to our freedom and privacy as members of the community. What is your stance on this subject?

— Isaac

Response

Anil Dwivedi

I believe this issue deserves a clear and thoughtful answer because it directly affects both public safety and our fundamental rights. After considering those concerns, I strongly oppose the use of Flock cameras in Humboldt County.

My position is not about being against public safety. Quite the opposite. I strongly support law enforcement and giving our officers the resources they need to keep our community safe. But public safety should never become a justification for the mass surveillance of law-abiding citizens.

Flock’s automated license plate reader technology raises several serious concerns:

Fourth Amendment and warrantless-surveillance concerns: The widespread collection and storage of information about people’s movements raises legitimate questions about privacy and unreasonable government surveillance.

Potential for abuse: Any system capable of searching and tracking people’s movements carries the risk of misuse. Access to such powerful technology must never become an opportunity to monitor individuals for improper purposes.

Mass collection without consent: These cameras don’t collect information only about criminal suspects. They capture information about ordinary, law-abiding people simply driving to work, taking their children to school, visiting friends, or going about their daily lives. To me, that crosses an important line between targeted law enforcement and mass surveillance.

Data sharing and security: Once information about our movements is collected and stored, legitimate questions arise about who can access it, who it can be shared with, how securely it is protected, and how it might ultimately be used.

Mission creep: Surveillance technology introduced today for one limited purpose can gradually be expanded tomorrow for purposes the public never originally agreed to.

Most importantly, I am concerned that collecting enormous amounts of information about innocent citizens can create new risks rather than simply making us safer. Sensitive information can potentially be misused, improperly accessed, shared beyond its original purpose, or compromised.

I refuse to accept the argument that we must choose between safety and freedom. We should demand both.

We can support our police, aggressively pursue criminals, and keep Humboldt County safe without creating a system that records the movements of thousands of innocent people who are suspected of absolutely nothing.

For these reasons, I strongly oppose Flock cameras in Humboldt County. Public safety should protect our freedom not require us to surrender it.

Anil Dwivedi

 

Are you a candidate? Log in here.

... or post a press release.