By: Carly Wasserman
Technology can make a police officer’s job much easier, but at what cost? According to a New York Times article, police officers in New York received special smartphones with the ability to access various arrest files, photos, motor vehicle databases, and even lists of nearby surveillance cameras as part of a pilot program begun quietly last summer. The program aims to increase law enforcement’s effectiveness by providing access to records once controlled by dispatchers or only available across various databases accessible via patrol car computers. With this information, police officers can quickly assess suspect situations and make informed decisions.
The pilot program provides officers with a wealth of information. For instance, officers involved in domestic dispute cases can see how many times police responded to complaints from the residence and the details of each visit. They can also check for any domestic violence reports, orders of protection, and gun registrations. Prior to the introduction of the program, officers often relied on dispatchers for information. When they radioed in names, they were often given minimum information, such as only being told if the individual had a warrant. Now, with smartphone technology, officers can quickly find out about all of the various offenses. Even if officers possessed access to patrol car computers, they had to search through numerous databases and often relied on unreliable internet connections. Smartphone technology bridges the gap that once existed between officers and personal records.
Advocates assert that the program aids law enforcement efforts, thus increasing public safety. However, various organizations express reservations. For instance, representatives from the New York Civil Liberties Union wonder if the smartphone technology will just become another tool to harass the people already disproportionately targeted by police. Various studies confirm a racial bias in law enforcement. A study by David Harris finds evidence that African Americans disproportionately face pretextual traffic stops by police, which can cause deep psychological and emotional scars, in addition to distorting their views of the legal system and social world. Furthermore, Gau and Brunson find citizens’ perceptions of procedural justice, hindered by racial profiling, influence their beliefs about police legitimacy, which plays a major role in determining if people will follow laws and cooperate with police. As such, we should be concerned with this new smartphone technology because it can be used to overpolice people already constantly watched and judged by the police, reinforcing racial and ethnic disparities that can harm the individuals victimized and even hinder policing efforts by eroding a sense of procedural justice and police legitimacy amongst the community necessary for police officers to effectively do their jobs. When police gain access to new technology, the benefits and concerns must be considered, because technological advances can have disparate impacts on various groups.
"A study by David Harris finds evidence that African Americans disproportionately face pretextual traffic stops by police, which can cause deep psychological and emotional scars, in addition to distorting their views of the legal system and social world."
ReplyDeleteIn the cases of certain racial, religious, or youth groups being over-policed or feeling the burden of disparate treatment, I would argue that their views are shaped by the reality of their interactions with law enforcement, not necessarily "distorted". If certain segments of the population continue to be stigmatized and marginalized by law enforcement practices, their negative experiences are the product of real problems within the justice system and society at large, not merely distortions of the reality.
-Anton Kienast
I didn't mean to suggest that profiling is not real. I meant that the views of those who suffer from profiling are a distortion of the ideals we have of the legal system and social world because of real, not imagined, threats.
DeleteI think the more information the police have the better they can do their jobs. As with any job, technology can and in this case will make it easier and in turn will make our streets safer. I don't see any negative sides to police using smartphone technology.
ReplyDelete-Kyle Porter
Providing police officers in New York with smartphones to help them better assess situations is a good thing indeed. However, as certain people are disproportionately targeted by police, it would then be better to maintain the employment of dispatchers and the use of databases that require access codes to serve as some sort of check-and-balance that could control or monitor information access.
ReplyDelete-Sehun Lee
I think this is great. This new technology is merely giving these officers more accurate information, and making it immediately accessible when they need it. The article states that these officers aren't getting more information that they would in patrol cars, it's just happening more quickly and efficiently, and they are receiving more detail. I don't think this new tactic is increasing policing of disproportionately targeted groups any more than other tactics. If anything it may decrease it. For example, officers said that sometimes they would be informed that the person in front of them has a warrant but not know if it is for a traffic ticket or for murder. With more detailed information, instead of assuming the worst, now they don't have to assume anything, and over-policing may be more easily avoided.
ReplyDeleteI don't necessarily agree that having more information is beneficial to cops, especially when that information is based almost entirely on behavioral actions, rather than actual interaction with a person. This reminds me of Overseers of the Poor and Gilliom's description of the intense surveillance imposed on families seeking welfare which nonetheless fails to capture the reality of their situations the way that a social worker often can. I believe actual police interaction with the community is what leads to fair and efficient enforcement of laws, rather than a cop cruising around in a patrol car gaining access to a person's entire life statistics without even physically talking to him or her.
ReplyDelete-Molly Ruiz
Great job! I like your analysis of the implementation of smartphone technology, its emphasis on public safety, and potential harms caused by an integrated system of public information. I think with any pilot system it needs time to prove its effectiveness. One of the main discussions this semester has been framed around limited resources and how organizations respond to it--is this a system that will allow police officers to spend less time on reactionary policing? And if so, then will they have more time to be proactive? In that case, I support a system that would enable law enforcement to spend more time gathering correct information before making a stop then simply stopping any black and brown boy that fits some generic description. How will personnel be effected? Will dispatchers have the same role? How will hiring practices be shaped by this new technological driven style of policing? I guess all of those questions will be answered over time...but to address your concerns, any new technology that assembles information about a person is in essence a profile and the dangers of its misuse/overuse against certain demographics is always a concern. However, I think it will be less reflective of new technology and more a testament to continuing "old-system" practices of policing those we feel are less than deserving.
ReplyDeleteGreat job Carly! I agree with Taylor, it doesn't seem that the use of smart phone technology infringes an individual's right to privacy so why shouldn't it be allowed to be police officers. The police officers can make better judgements of the people they are detaining through the easily accessible smartphone, and in certain cases call for more back up. Good analysis in interpreting both sides of the use of smart phones, however, I believe that the pro's outweigh the con's, consequently, making it permissible for police officers to use new smart phones on the job.
ReplyDelete- Andres Diaz
I think it is a positive thing police forces are using smart phones. Any way to give them an advantage in our society by cracking down on criminal activity, if smart phones help them do so then i am all for it. The more sources and information police can gather the more it will both benefit them and our society's safety.
ReplyDelete-Derek Campbell
I think that this could be very beneficial for cops in the long run. While arguments about racial profiling can be made I think that as long as the technology is being used for everyone who is stopped and not just those of a certain race or class then it would do more good than harm. In many cases police making an arrest or a stop do not have all the information they need on be suspect and this would eliminate or at the very east reduce this problem.
ReplyDeleteI found myself asking a lot of questions while reading this post. The first was did the police force keep the pilot program quiet and if so, why? I think the answer to said question could help us identify the candidness with which the NYPD operates. If they are deliberately choosing to mislead or deceive the public, then I would be much less inclined to favor the new technological adaptations. The second question was, why does new technology automatically lead to an increase in over-policing? Police officers have continual access to information about citizens so that they can gage certain situations with more clarity and informed decisions. While I whole-heartedly support the part of your argument which says, "when police gain access to new technology, the benefits and concerns must be considered" I disagree that more technology automatically means more profiling. I do, however, think that certain studies demonstrate a clear link between tech-happy policeman and racial profiling but I would argue that this behavior is NOT a result of the technology but rather the technology allows us to empirically observe cops' continual marginalization of minorities. - Chelsea Goddard
ReplyDelete