[Peace-discuss] IL state bill HB4405/SB2562 would allow use of drones to monitor protestors - call Rep. Ammons to vote No on it.

Thu May 3 17:37:14 UTC 2018

Thank you Stuart,

I called, they were very receptive. We need to circulate this info as much as possible. If its coming to Chicago, it will be going elsewhere across the nation as well.

On May 3, 2018, at 09:09, Stuart Levy via Peace-discuss <peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>> wrote:

Bill HB4405 / SB2562 in the IL legislature, apparently supported by Chicago Mayor Emanuel, would allow police to use drones to record protestors.   The ACLU of IL opposes it.   It passed in the IL Senate yesterday - unfortunately Bennett was one of many Yes votes, though Sen. Biss was among only 6 No votes.

I'm calling Rep. Ammons' office now to ask her to oppose HB4405 - hope you will too.
Ammons' office: 217-531-1660

====
ACLU-IL sounds the alarm about bill allowing use of drones to monitor protesters - Urgent calls to your IL Rep needed

Fran Spielman <https://chicago.suntimes.com/author/fspielmancst/>
@fspielman <https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=fspielman> | email
<fspielman at suntimes.com><mailto:fspielman at suntimes.com>

The American Civil Liberties Union on Tuesday accused Mayor Rahm Emanuel of
being the heavy hand behind legislation that would allow police officers to
use drones to monitor the growing number of protests on the streets of
Chicago.

The groundbreaking bill would allow drones to be used to hover over crowds,
for the purpose of taking still photos and making audio and video
recordings of demonstrations. Even more troubling to the ACLU, the drones
could be equipped with facial recognition technology.

The legislation has already cleared Illinois House and Senate committees
and is poised for a final vote in both chambers.

The bills are sponsored by a pair of Chicago Democrats with close ties to
the mayor: State Sen. Martin Sandoval and State Rep. John D’Amico, nephew
of Ald. Marge Laurino (39th), the City Council’s president pro tem and one
of Emanuel’s closest aldermanic allies.

“Given Chicago’s history of surveillance against protesters and social
justice advocates – including by the notorious Red Squad — the Chicago
police should not be able to use this new, powerful tool to monitor
protesters near silently and from above,” Karen Sheley, director of the
ACLU Police Practices Project, was quoted as saying in a news release.

“The legislation also ignores sweeping surveillance tools currently
available to the police – including an integrated public camera system that
covers much of the city.”

Sheley noted that the House and Senate versions of the controversial bill
“effectively guts” legislation passed three years ago requiring a judicial
warrant for the use of drones by police in Illinois.

She wondered aloud why that’s even necessary at a time when there are 2,700
public safety cameras in Chicago that are part of a broader network of
27,000 private and government surveillance cameras.

That Big Brother network should be more than enough to keep close watch
over the growing number of demonstrations protesting the immigration,
travel ban and environmental policies of President Donald Trump.

“If this bill is passed, as drafted, during the next large scale political
rally, drones could identify and list people protesting the Trump
administration,” added Sheley.

“The sight of drones overhead, collecting information, may deter people
from protesting in a time when so many want to exercise their First
Amendment rights . . . This is too much unchecked power to give to the
police — in Chicago or anywhere.”

Mayoral spokesperson Julienn Kaviar said the city met with the ACLU and
“incorporated their input” to develop the proposed update to Illinois’
drone regulations.

The goal was “balancing privacy rights and ensuring the safety of those
attending large-scale events in Chicago – whether at the annual
Lollapalooza music festival or an impromptu World Series celebration,”
Kaviar said.

If House and Senate approve the plan, law enforcement agencies would be
required to report the date, time, location and authorized exception under
the law in which the drone was used. The police department would also be
required to delete any surveillance or other information gathered after 30
days, unless the information is relevant to a criminal matter.

“Under the current state law, CPD can only use a drone under very limited
circumstances, such as preventing terrorism. This update simply allows CPD
to monitor and secure large-scale events where a legitimate public safety
interest exists in a more efficient manner, as we do currently with the
existing security camera network,” Kaviar wrote in an email to the
Sun-Times.

“The proposed updates would not change the existing privacy protections and
limitations under the current law.”

Two years ago, a Chicago Sun-Times report that Chicago Police had opened
six investigation into protest groups since 2009 prompted
<https://chicago.suntimes.com/chicago-politics/the-watchdogs-spy-cops-chicago-police-routinely-spied-on-protesters/>
the chairman of the City Council’s Progressive Caucus to demand a hearing
on police spying on protest groups.

At the time, Ald. Scott Waguespack (32nd) characterized the police
monitoring of labor organizations, Occupy Chicago, Rainbow PUSH and other
demonstrators
<https://chicago.suntimes.com/chicago-politics/alderman-police-need-to-explain-spying-on-protesters/>
as unnecessary and intrusive.

After demonstrations in Ferguson, Missouri, police began using an
intelligence-gathering center in Chicago they share with federal
authorities to collect Internet data on African-American and left-wing
groups protesting police tactics.

Police officials have said the investigations are legal and crucial to
protecting public safety and they make sure that people’s rights are
protected.

But Waguespack maintained that the investigations were “absolutely
politically motivated.”

The alderman further noted before the NATO Summit in 2012, the City Council
approved new regulations that required protesters to share event plans with
the police.

At the time, Emanuel took issue with the resolution’s claim that the police
“failed to provide evidence” its surveillance programs require “any proper
legal evidentiary standard of proof.”

“We’ll take a look at the notion,” Emanuel said, but he added, “I do
believe that doing proper policing and civil liberties are consistent.”
Fran Spielman <https://chicago.suntimes.com/author/fspielmancst/>
Follow me on Twitter @fspielman
<https://twitter.com/intent/user?screen_name=fspielman>
Email: fspielman at suntimes.com<mailto:fspielman at suntimes.com>

https://chicago.suntimes.com/?post_type=cst_article&p=1070628

More coverage of this bill is here:
http://www.thedrive.com/tech/20587/police-should-not-be-allowed-to-monitor-protests-via-drone-aclu-says

_______________________________________________
Peace-discuss mailing list
Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net<mailto:Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net>
https://lists.chambana.net/mailman/listinfo/peace-discuss

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.chambana.net/pipermail/peace-discuss/attachments/20180503/8b2aad89/attachment-0001.html>