FROM Ali Winston
The Real-life Consequences of Flawed Gang Databases South LA has made great strides when it comes to gang violence over the last several decades, and one tool in the belt of law enforcement has been a database called CalGang. It’s supposed to be a place where law enforcement can cross-check the names of suspects or people in police custody with a list of known gang members. However, according to a state audit out this week, the database is deeply flawed. There are unverified entries, out-of-date information and some of the information is just plain wrong. As it turns out, that can have far-reaching consequences, because immigration officials use the data to deport undocumented people, including those who may have never had gang ties in the US.
Facial Recognition – Good Policing or Invasion of Privacy? LA Sheriff’s deputies have been taking fingerprints with mobile devices for years. Now, they’re equipped with 126 smartphones and tablets to take pictures of people they encounter out in the field. What does this mean for civilian privacy?
LA Law Enforcement to Collect Biometric Data Without any public notice at all, Los Angeles County is taking bids for compiling America’s biggest repository of personal data outside what’s kept by the FBI. And it’s not just personal records, it’s personal characteristics—not only fingerprints, but palm prints, pictures and scans of the iris in your eye. Voice recordings could be next. There’s never been any public announcement. The project was discovered by the Center for Investigative Reporting in the Bay Area.
Will the Senate write a healthcare bill in secret? While Democrats and Republicans argue White House relations with Russia, another question is being decided behind closed doors: who gets help buying health insurance and who doesn't? We hear how the pros and cons are being shrouded in secrecy.
Terrorism and tweets, hate speech and murder Just days before an election, Britain is coping with a rash of deadly terrorism, and Prime Minister Theresa May is on the defensive. And again today, President Trump has tweeted criticism of the Mayor of London. Later, a double murder in Portland, Oregon has revealed the ugly past of a supposedly “progressive” city. One immediate question: is “hate speech” protected by the First Amendment?