Secrecy and anonymity are becoming relics of a bygone age. Anyone living in modern America has gotten used to the unblinking stare of security cameras, found in stores, banks, office buildings and even on street corners. They are especially prevalent in Chicago, where police maintain some 1,200 surveillance cameras.
But that's yesterday's law enforcement advance. Today there's a new one: devices that recognize faces.
The Wall Street Journal reports that BI2 Technologies of Plymouth, Mass., is making gadgets that will let police take photos of people on the street from a few feet away and match them against a database of known offenders. They could also be used up close to scan people's irises, an even more precise form of identification.
The technology has obvious value in spotting wanted criminals who previously were able to lose themselves in crowds of humanity. Whitey Bulger, who eluded the FBI for 16 years, might have been caught on one of his regular walks along the beach in Santa Monica had local cops been able to deploy a device like this. Anyone on the lam would have to fear venturing out in public, even in disguise, lest a cop unleash his Instant Crook Finder.
The question, of course, is whether the innovation may compromise privacy, for the innocent as well as the guilty. But using a camera-like device to snap random passersby poses no apparent constitutional issue, since it doesn't involve a search or a seizure, any more than video surveillance cameras do.
It merely duplicates what a police officer might do with his eyes — looking at individuals in public in search of bad guys whose appearance he has memorized. Iris scans, by contrast, being more invasive and possibly requiring a stop, are more akin to taking fingerprints, which police may not do without "reasonable suspicion."
Some police advise caution in deploying the gadgets. Bill Johnson, executive director of the National Association of Police Organizations, warned against promiscuous iris scans: "Even technically if some law says you can do it, it is not worth it — it is just not the right thing to do." BI2 chief executive Sean Mullin told the Journal, "Sheriffs and law enforcement should not use this on anybody but suspected criminals."
If some erosion of privacy looms, it will probably come as much from the availability of face-recognition software to ordinary people as from nosy police. You may not worry about the cops if you've done nothing wrong, but that weird guy checking you out on the elevated platform could be a different story.
Most Americans, however, seem willing to trade some privacy for the benefits of the digital age. Those ubiquitous surveillance cameras? Few of us even notice them. And when they provide vital evidence in an ugly crime, we're grateful they're around.
Any tool employed by police has the potential for harm, from service pistols to wiretaps. The right approach for face-recognition devices is the same as for previous advances: Put them to careful use when they are needed, but don't get carried away.