Privacy vs. security: electronic surveillance in the nation's capitalOn March 22, 2002, RAND Senior Policy Analyst John Woodward testified before a hearing of the Subcommittee on the District of Columbia of the House Committee on Government Reform. The subcommittee convened the hearing in response to law enforcement's use of video surveillance at public areas in Washington, D.C. The testimony focuses on reasons for and concerns about the use of such technology, the legal status quo with respect to such use, options for Congress to consider, and issues related to future use of electronic surveillance and other technologies. |
What people are saying - Write a review
We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.
Common terms and phrases
2002 available Amendment protects Big Brother Bio/Nano/Materials Technology Biometrics CCTV system circuit television CCTV clandestine capture Closed circuit television Commissioner of Canada Commissioner Radwanski concerns Congress could decide Congress is free data mining databases electronic surveillance Emerging Technologies entity invading example expectation of privacy facial recognition Fourth Amendment Genomics government actor greater privacy protections House Bill 454 immediate action individual information e.g. information-gathering technologies interlinkages invading an individual's Jeffrey Rosen Kelowna law enforcement legal status quo letter of finding Miller monitor public OCTV Open circuit television Options for Congress Overhead Imaging personal information postnote Privacy Commissioner privacy rights Prohibit provide greater privacy public places public safety resources RAND RCMP's reasonable expectation recording capability Regulate sensitive locations Super Bowl Supreme Court surveillance cameras surveillance technologies Take No Immediate technological heroin terrorist tracking transparency U.S. Constitution United Kingdom video cameras video surveillance voluntarily conveyed watch or record Woodward York Times Magazine