Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

In this Discussion

Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.

    Support MFO

  • Donate through PayPal

"Justice Needs No Mask" legislation introduced in Michigan house, July 2025

My own PSA: July 25, 2025

A bill introduced in the Michigan legislature by Democratic lawmakers would prohibit law enforcement officers from wearing masks or otherwise concealing their identity while interacting with the public. The bill, named "Justice Needs No Mask," also mandates that officers display their name or badge number and the name or initials of their law enforcement agency. Exceptions would be made for undercover operations, hazardous environments, and situations requiring protective gear for disease prevention. Violations of the proposed law could result in a 90-day jail sentence and/or a $1,000 fine.

The bill's sponsor, Rep. Betsy Coffia, cited concerns about the use of masked federal agents, particularly in the context of immigration enforcement, and the potential for impersonation and criminal activity. She argued that transparency and accountability are crucial for maintaining public trust in law enforcement. While some police agencies already adhere to similar transparency measures, Coffia stated that the bill is a response to recent incidents where masked individuals engaged in what appeared to be violent kidnappings or detentions, according to a Michigan news article.

The bill has faced criticism, with some arguing that it unfairly targets law enforcement and could put officers in danger. However, Rep. Coffia says it is a necessary step to ensure public safety and accountability. The bill is similar to one introduced in the US Senate by Sen. Elissa Slotkin, MI reports WWMT, and has the support of some Democratic lawmakers in the state.

Comments

  • Good!

    The public currently has NO FRICKIN IDEA who these masked toy personal or soldiers are. If there's nothing to hide then don't hide it.
  • I guess, in today's world, if a gang of right stuff men decided to pick up an immigrant virgin and rape her, it would be ok especially if they impregnated her with some of that more worthy blood.
  • edited July 26
    There are a lot of important issues involved in the proposed legislation. But on a broader front, it ties in with the growing use of facial recognition software. Brave new world.

    Story #1 ”Imagine you’re walking down the street and a stranger snaps your photo with his smartphone. He uses a facial recognition app and within minutes, he knows your name, age, where you were born, and your Social Security number. Think it’s a scene from the movie Minority Report? Think again.”

    Story #2 “In the second experiment, they discovered the identities of students walking on campus, by linking images of their faces to those of their Facebook profiles. Photographs of students’ faces also eventually led researchers to guess their personal interests and, in some cases, their Social Security numbers …”

    Story #3 ”When Kelly Conlon, a lawyer, tried to join her daughter's Girl Scout troop at a Rockettes performance the weekend after Thanksgiving, the venue scanned her face and barred her entry. Conlon reportedly appeared on an "attorney exclusion list" created by Radio City Music Hall's parent company, MSG Entertainment, “

    Story #4 “ Have you ever wondered if the stores you shop at are watching you? Not just with security cameras. With something more advanced and creepy. Something that can recognize your face and identify who you are, where you live, what you like, and what you buy. Something that can track your every move and use your data for their own benefit. Well, guess what? They are. That’s right, some of the biggest retailers in this country are secretly using sneaky facial recognition technology in their stores.”


  • masks for virus protection of self , and more importantly others : Not OK.
    in a world of nutjobs disguised as law enforcement, masks for law enforcement disguised as civilians : OK.

    many years ago, asians came up with a low cost way to protect privacy : masks imprinted with alternative\generic\distorted facial features. AI flagged them as human but unidentified.
  • edited July 27
    The entire scene is terrifying. ICE agents dressed in plain cloths, jumping out of unmarked cars, and their faces covered, grabbing people off the streets. Add Marines patrolling some city streets. Makes me sick.

    My point above is (1) The masks are intended to prevent retaliation / harassment of them and their families by people who oppose their acts and are equipped with facial recognition software. Heck, no need to snap a photo on a cell phone. There are now internet connected eyeglasses you can wear that act like a camera.

    By extension, I fear that in another 5 or 10 years it will be dangerous to go out in public without facial covering unless you want your every movement, anywhere, everywhere, all the time being tracked and appearing all over the internet along with address, phone, SS number and possibly details about family members, your job and your finances. Every step you take, every business, store, entertainment venue you visit. Everything you buy. Everyone you associate with. All easily retrievable by anyone with internet.

    Think of it. AI + facial recognition. What a combination.

    Good post @Catch22
  • edited July 27
    "Think of it. AI + facial recognition. What a combination."

    China has used facial recognition software (in conjunction with AI) for years to monitor it's citizens.
    In January of this year, the Electronic Frontier Foundation drafted a memo to the Trump administration
    regarding privacy and surveillance.
    The majority of the memo's Surveillance section is below.
    I haven't yet read the entire memo...

    "As our technology becomes cheaper and faster, smaller and more wearable, our activities, our location, and even our otherwise private conversations have all become more available to scrutiny at all levels of government. Additionally, private companies collect more and more data—search history, location, purchase history, content of unencrypted conversations, and more—and frequently make that data available to the government, often without being legally required to do so. Law enforcement and the intelligence community continue to insist that such broad collection and access to data do not affect privacy and civil liberties."

    "Those same entities then fight any limitation on their use of this data, on the theory that the data was 'legally collected.' This Catch-22 approach results in a system that no longer meets traditional Fourth Amendment requirements. This trend needs to be reversed."

    "DOJ officials from both political parties have told Congress that the government needs to have 'every tool in the toolbox' to keep the nation safe, and that Congress and the public should just trust them to do what is right. But a nation built on the rule of law does not depend on trust; it depends on transparency and accountability."

    "Stringent rules designed to protect individual liberty and privacy are not a referendum on the character of the people who work in law enforcement or the intelligence community. Rather, they are an important statement about the values we hold as Americans—freedom from tyranny also requires freedom from unfettered surveillance of our minds, bodies, and movements, as well as reasonable restrictions on how and when that surveillance can occur."

    "As biometric technology (like facial recognition) and artificial intelligence technology become cheaper and more accessible, it is imperative for Congress and the Administration to understand the inherent risks and to put in place strong protections to limit or restrict their use. Many forms of surveillance technology are often used first at the border before expanding to the interior of the country. Unchecked use of such technologies presents risks to the privacy, security, and civil liberties of U.S. persons and non-U.S. persons alike. Additionally, when the government is freely given access to consumer data collected by companies, this sensitive data is now potentially criminal evidence, collected broadly, without cause or a warrant."

    https://www.eff.org/wp/eff-transition-memo-incoming-trump-administration
  • Think of it. AI + facial recognition. What a combination.
    The Jason Bourne films showed the surveillance capability in order to identify and track individuals in various locations. Today, the AI used by FBI can identify individuals who is wearing a mask. Many offenders were identified and convicted in January 6th insurrection.
  • edited July 28
    Thanks for the material @Observant1 / Nice to know I wasn’t hallucinating about the potentials for tremendous invasion of privacy. I have long been aware that cities like NYC have camera surveillance - and I think for good public safety reasons. But the potential for abuse exists. I wasn’t of course defending the ICE people wearing masks. Frightening as I said. But it’s also a portent of a growing technological threat. My confidence in Congress to provide safeguards? About 1 out of 10.

    About a year ago - maybe longer - TSA began taking facial shots of everyone passing through security at all the airports I’ve been through. Maybe a testament to the accuracy / reliability of facial recognition technology.
  • edited July 28
    Big brother is no longer coming.... it's here. ADD: we volunteer our information. How many use facial recognition software on their phones to unlock accounts rather than using passwords. Raises my hand... Guilty as charged.
  • edited July 28
    gman57 said:

    Big brother is no longer coming.... it's here. ADD: we volunteer our information. How many use facial recognition software on their phones to unlock accounts rather than using passwords. Raises my hand... Guilty as charged.

    It’s all there isn’t it? your facial ID, your finger print, your whereabouts if carrying a cellular device or driving a connected car (my last two have been) your name, SS #, credit score, bank card numbers, and virtually everything you buy. What time you go to bed and wake up (if you use Siri). Also, the TV programs you watch and what you stream.

    I have an online account at Walmart. Cancelled the free-shipping membership ($99 yearly) but still order a few things. Guess what? The online account displays every item I ever purchased at their various brick & mortar locations. I guess they do it following my debit card / credit cards. But, possibly, they are using biometrics as well.

    What happens when all this collected garbage winds up in the wrong hands?

  • Just before walking through the newfangled stupid security machine in which you must hold up your arms, the lovely and gorgeous TSA guy will take your picture. Another new Big Brother tactic. As I stood in front of the camera, I smiled and said: "Smile for more total Orwell surveillance." The agent probably never heard of Orwell, nor understood what "surveillance" means. He said, "what?" I just muttered, "never mind."
  • edited July 28
    My brother paid cash for everything, stayed off the internet for the most part. Never shared his info. He passed recently and I wondered does/did it matter? In this new world of data we're just a bunch of bits in some computer someplace. Man's new eternity, we'll last maybe 100 or 200 years into the future as data someplace... until someone reboots everything!! LOL
  • I just remind myself that I am probably too unimportant compared to many, many people to be noticed just by chance. Some like me will be unlucky and come to notice but the probablility is that it won't be me. (I still worry and wish there was zero chance.)
  • Anna said:

    I just remind myself that I am probably too unimportant compared to many, many people to be noticed just by chance. Some like me will be unlucky and come to notice but the probablility is that it won't be me. (I still worry and wish there was zero chance.)

    Don’t kid yourself. If you have a dollar to your name you’re being “noticed” by someone somewhere.
Sign In or Register to comment.