If you think facial profiling is strictly for the guilty, you will be shocked to learn that there is a high likelihood your profile is already flagged. According to an Atlantic article, there is “a 50 percent chance that a photo of your face is in at least one database used in police facial-recognition systems.”
Unlike other types of searches, facial recognition is extensively pervasive in public spaces, not to mention invasive of our privacy. Not only does this type of search make it easier for police to trace suspects in terms of physical features, but it also targets large groups of perfectly innocent people unsuspected of crime.
You may be wondering, “How is the facial-recognition system able to detect who’s guilty of a crime and who’s not without a database to check against?” The truth of the matter is that this system does just that, collecting photos through surveillance footage of millions of Americans.
In order to verify suspected identifications, the system requires importing ID photos of ordinary citizens, many of which are innocent, into search databases. According to the Atlantic, “80 percent of the photos that appear in the FBI’s facial-recognition network are of non-criminals. Only 8 percent show known criminals.” The irony of law-abiding Americans constituting a majority of those found in criminal-seeking networks is a hard pill to swallow.
Moreover, of the roughly 117 million Americans whose images appear in facial-recognition databases, a large number of them are black. Because many African-Americans are found guilty by law enforcement officials, their profiles are over-represented in these systems, automatically placing those who are innocent at a racially biased disadvantage. There is no current solution in place for racially biased errors occurring in facial-recognition databases. However, the system’s limited accuracy with photographs of black people has created racial controversy warranting a number of suggested resolutions.
One step toward eliminating these errors, as well as lowering privacy concerns held by those who are innocent, could come from relying on police photographs of possible suspects rather than gathered photo IDs. Should this method of identity verification continue to prevail, a court order allowing the search of such documentation should be required. Furthermore, photo IDs and driver licenses should only be used in cases of serious crime where drastic measures are proven necessary.
The current use of facial-recognition technology also raises concerns regarding the preservation of private information. Law enforcement has yet to eliminate from their database profiles of innocent Americans, having millions of profiles at their disposal at any given time. From what we as a nation have witnessed with respect to our country’s major government agencies, we hold the right to fear the potential dangers of having our confidential information released into the public sector.
Today, facial profiling employs new technology enabling law enforcement officials to scan faces in a crowd and later compare these findings to profiles already stored in existing databases. With the “Mobile Offender Recognition and Information System” device compatible with the iPhone, faces are able to be detected from as close as 5 feet away. This same technology is used to track terrorists.
The fact that our nation’s law enforcement agencies profile our country’s own citizens in the same way they do serious threats to our nation’s security should come as a warning sign regarding the true preservation of our privacy. Rightfully convicting those guilty of crime comes at the cost of surrendering the majority who are innocent.
