
Police in Canada Are Tracking People’s ‘Negative’ Behavior in a ‘Risk' Database - longdefeat
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/kzdp5v/police-in-canada-are-tracking-peoples-negative-behavior-in-a-risk-database
======
upofadown
If the data in the database is "de-identified" then how does it eventually
lead to interventions?

------
staticautomatic
I don't understand what's so bad about this as a program.

~~~
omouse
Here are a few quotes that are, hopefully, explanatory of why it's bad:

> One Ontario social worker, who participates in a Situation Table and spoke
> to Motherboard on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to
> speak to the media, expressed worry about the high number of minors being
> evaluated for intervention, and having their information added to the RTD,
> _because of “how often [interventions] are done without consent.”_

And:

> According to Israel, there is a risk that if authorities don’t refine the
> data in the RTD over time to determine if a specific risk factor actually
> leads to increased crime or harm, flawed predictions could influence
> policing decisions.

Finally:

> “We can’t have processes that are based on using exceptions to privacy law,
> with no transparency or accountability as to how [Hubs] are interpreting
> those exceptions,” she said. “Privacy is a human right. It can’t be eroded
> just to make someone’s job easier.”

So it boils down to:

\- no consent \- flawed data that influences predictive algorithms (which are
not transparent and not audited) \- privacy is a human right, this tracking
program violates that right (at least as it is currently implemented)

If you live in a democracy, you can expect certain rights (and of course the
responsibilities that come with those rights). If you're a taxpayer, you can
also expect certain things of your government.

Essentially this boils down to "Canada is a democracy, not an authoritarian
regime that monitors and tracks people".

~~~
staticautomatic
No need to patronize. I read the article. Obviously it has problems that need
to be addressed. I just don't find the program as a whole to be conceptually
objectionable.

------
DKnoll
While I think there are some causes for concern here, especially bearing in
mind the high value Canadians place on individual privacy, there are positive
elements to this.

>Hub assessments and interventions often involve people who are especially
vulnerable. For example, many cases focus on minors: in North Bay, Ontario, 45
percent of those deemed to require an intervention in 2015 were between 12 and
17 years old, [according to a report] in the Northern Ontario Medical Journal.

The part of this quote from the article wrapped in square brackets links to
this report: [http://www.nomj.ca/2016/12/11/mobilization-hubs-support-
peop...](http://www.nomj.ca/2016/12/11/mobilization-hubs-support-people-at-
risk.html)

Here is an excerpt:

>The mobilization hub deals with all ages. Witmer says in North Bay the number
of seniors requiring services has increased. Police often get repeat 911 calls
from elderly people who may have no family supports. Witmer points out that 65
per cent of the top risk factors at the North Bay table are related to mental
health issues. “With mental health, it’s not someone who has committed a
crime, it’s where they’re moving in that direction. Police would maybe get 10
calls from the same person, someone who is off the rails. If we can go in and
support them and get them connected before they really go off the rails then
that’s helped the system,” said Witmer. He recalls one case where a panhandler
with mental health and alcohol issues was the subject of repeated public
complaint calls to the police. The case went to the mobilization hub and,
together, the agencies helped the man find counseling, housing, and additional
supports to get him off the streets.

This program has the potential, as in the case above, to keep people out of
the criminal justice system and divert them to community programs that can
assist them. In past situations like this would likely be handled with an
arrest.

I would encourage everyone to take anything Vice Media says in regards to
Canadian government (or really anything except pop culture) with a grain of
salt. They are critical of the government and police 100% of the time
regardless of who is in power and refuse to recognise positive changes when
they occur because outrage gets more views.

>Documents obtained by Motherboard from Ontario’s Ministry of Community Safety
and Correctional Services (MCSCS) through an access to information request
show that at least two provinces—Ontario and Saskatchewan—maintain a “Risk-
driven Tracking Database” that is used to amass highly sensitive information
about people’s lives.

This statement implies that this database is kept a secret, when in reality if
you Google 'Risk-driven Tracking Database' you get a fair bit of information
on it. In addition every document and resource they reference in the article
has been published publicly by either the federal government or various
municipal and regional governments.

To imply that this type of policing is new or unprecedented ignores the
Peelian Principles originating from London in the 19th century used as a model
for police across the Commonwealth. The first of these 9 principles is as
follows:

>To prevent crime and disorder, as an alternative to their repression by
military force and severity of legal punishment.

~~~
frabbit
> They are critical of the government and police 100% of the time regardless
> of who is in power

What on earth is wrong with that?

~~~
DKnoll
You cut out the part of my sentence in that quote which says what's wrong with
that.

