
NYC passes POST Act, requiring police department to reveal surveillance tech - colawars
https://venturebeat.com/2020/06/18/new-york-city-council-passes-law-requiring-nypd-to-reveal-its-surveillance-technologies/
======
Barrin92
Am I misunderstanding something here or does this imply that up until now the
city of NYC did not have full access and transparency concerning the
capacities of the NYPD?

How is this even a thing? I don't know much about the US political system but
how is it that the police is not entirely subjected to civic government and
why does a law need to be passed to control what the NYPD does?

~~~
bobthepanda
Generally speaking, the NYPD operates under the executive branch (the mayor)
and the legislative branch (City Council) can declare whatever powers they
want to oversee, but they do have to be explicitly declared first.

The separation of powers in NYC/NYS is very messy so this doesn't surprise me.

~~~
thinkingemote
Can the mayor make the police reveal things? Is the mayor elected by the
population?

~~~
bobthepanda
The elected mayor can, if they want to. Or at least they can start a fight.

The police union, however, is a very organized labor union, and the current
mayor was brought to heel even though he was elected on the most anti-police
platform of his first election.

------
walterbell
Does this include Google's Sidewalk / CityBridge / LinkNYC kiosks (multiple
sensors and cameras) partnership with NYC?

[https://gizmodo.com/nycs-free-wifi-service-is-turning-
into-a...](https://gizmodo.com/nycs-free-wifi-service-is-turning-into-a-
privacy-nightm-1765474061)

[https://cryptome.org/2016/06/linknyc-spy-kiosks-
installation...](https://cryptome.org/2016/06/linknyc-spy-kiosks-installation-
videos.htm)

[https://theintercept.com/2020/05/08/andrew-cuomo-eric-
schmid...](https://theintercept.com/2020/05/08/andrew-cuomo-eric-schmidt-
coronavirus-tech-shock-doctrine/)

~~~
rmrfstar
And more...

“This is a partnership, not a contractual relationship.” [1]

"Because of partner relations and legal authorities, SSO Corporate sites are
often controlled by the partner, who filters the communications before sending
to NSA." [2]

[1] [https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/us/politics/att-helped-
ns...](https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/us/politics/att-helped-nsa-spy-on-
an-array-of-internet-traffic.html)

[2]
[https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/15/us/documents....](https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/08/15/us/documents.html)

------
akudha
In the last few weeks many cities have passed laws to bring more transparency
to police brutality.

This is a good step, but I am curious - how much are these laws enforceable? I
was just reading that some Atlanta cops are not reporting to work - protest
for the arrest of the cop who shot Rayshard Brooks. If that is the mentality,
how much cooperation can we expect? Not talking about this particular NYC law,
just in general.

~~~
tomschlick
The cops that walked out regarding the charges for the RB shooting did so
because it seems the DA is contradicting Georgia law, and his own statements
from a few weeks ago.

A taser is considered a deadly weapon under GA law and the DA had charged
other officers a few weeks ago with using a taser as a deadly weapon. Now he
is saying its not a deadly weapon when stolen and used against them, and
didn't warrant deadly force to be used in return. He also didn't even wait for
the Georgia Bureau of Investigation's report with the facts on the shooting.

That's why the police walked out. Form all account's I have seen so far, that
officer seems to have followed that department's use of force continuum
guidelines correctly and GA law but was still charged for seemingly political
points by a DA who is up for re-election. You're not going to get cooperation
when cops feel that they have done everything according to policy/state law
and can still get charged because an angry mob demands it.

Here is a breakdown from a former police officer who dives into it a little
further:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5QEnGkIbzA](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5QEnGkIbzA)

~~~
mindslight
I agree that this case is debatable, but you left out the fact that RB was
_running away_ when shot. The officer did not shoot in self-defense.

Also we would expect any regular citizen to be arrested and charged in this
situation. That's precisely what courts are for - to sort out whether the
details are strong enough to warrant conviction. Police should not have some
informal parallel justice system outside of the courts - that's the whole
point.

~~~
tomschlick
The officer did shoot in self defense. Rayshard shot the taser as he was
running away. The officer when seeing the taser being pointed at him
immediately dropped his own and drew his sidearm and fired. By that time
(under half a second) the taser had fired at him and RB had turned back around
with the taser still in his hand. Taser X2s have two shots instead of one, so
he was still armed with a deadly weapon according to GA law. He showed utter
disregard for the life of the officer whom he fired at and escalated the
situation to deadly force. He escalated the situation from a simple and
cordial DUI arrest to deadly force because he didn’t want to go back to jail
for a parole violation.

From everything I have seen the cop was justified by law. Still a shitty
situation but this smells of politics by the DA.

Edit: forgot to mention that Tennessee vs Garner established that officers
have justification to use deadly force to stop someone fleeing who is a deadly
danger to the public.

~~~
mindslight
Continuing to chase and shooting RB in the back contradicts the claim of self
defense. At any time, the officer could have stopped the immediate chase and
ended the confrontation. This would have been the prudent thing to do, given
that they had his ID (and his car), and the two officers hadn't recovered from
being overwhelmed.

This is a good example of why responding officers shouldn't carry firearms or
even tasers on their person - they're too quick to keep escalating like they
see on TV. If a suspect violently escapes arrest, then send in a larger armed
crew with a deliberate plan.

re your addition: Seems like a decision that enables bad policing. Nothing
about the situation makes it seem like RB was actually a danger to the public,
but the police will push that justification all day long to legitimize what
was essentially a personal ego escalation.

~~~
tomschlick
You’re arguing the morality not the legality. I’m arguing the latter,
specifically related to the DA in this case bringing up charges against and
officer where by law he seems more than covered. That’s it.

~~~
mindslight
The morality is important, as we're talking about whether to prosecute and
legal arguments can be made both ways. As I said, I do not agree that a person
stealing a taser constitutes a deadly danger to the public. Even if the taser
is considered a deadly weapon, there was no demonstrated intent to attack
random people.

As this is not a clear cut case of justifiable homicide, the right thing to do
is let a court sort it out. If the courts are too slow and expensive, welcome
to another broken aspect of the criminal justice system that is in dire need
of reform!

------
schoolornot
There is something even MORE important to be released and that is the police
training manuals and materials which the NYPD have been hiding from FOIL
requests for over a decade now.

To all New Yorkers: You are currently NOT ENTITLED to see the methods and
techniques taught at the NYPD academy.

Requests are being denied on these grounds: "Deniable records include records
or portions thereof that: (e) are compiled for law enforcement purposes and
which if disclosed would: iv. reveal criminal investigative techniques or
procedures, except routine techniques and procedures;"

~~~
squarefoot
Very likely they're using military psychological training. The rules of
engagement they adopt against citizens don't seem that different from those
used by soldiers in enemy territory. The complete lack of empathy towards
human life reminds of the depersonalizing of the enemy that helps soldiers
remain efficient and detached while they slaughter their "targets". For that
matter, even more important than the manuals are the speeches by their
instructors; I would like to see the videos and what indoctrination techniques
they use during training. A cop can't turn himself into 9/10 of a psychopath
just by reading books. And of course I would push for mandatory drugs and
steroids abuse tests for all of them.

~~~
mtgp1000
This post is at odds with the fact that the military teaches stricter rules of
engagement than police forces. There may be a culture problem in the force but
this post is hysteria.

Police deal with violent criminals who have no regard for police life; in fact
often they are explicitly against police. They're going to learn techniques
appropriate for dealing with such people. Some of those techniques will be
violent and resemble "military" tactics, but that's only because the military
also deals with violent adversaries.

~~~
TaylorAlexander
I mean, I’ve been hearing a lot of cases where the police killed people who
were definitely not “violent criminals who have no regard for police life”.
Brianna Taylor’s boyfriend wasn’t a violent criminal when he fired at the
police.

“ A defence attorney for Taylor’s boyfriend, Kenneth Walker, says he fired in
self-defence because police did not announce themselves and that he believed
they were breaking in to the home.”

The police did a no-knock raid unannounced on the wrong home, then shot EMT
Brianna Taylor 8 times. Those violent techniques are at issue here. They seem
to be violations of 5th and/or 14th amendment rights and clearly not
appropriate.

[https://lailasnews.com/international/brianna-taylor-death-
br...](https://lailasnews.com/international/brianna-taylor-death-briana-
taylor-killed-by-police-shooting-update/)

~~~
6AA4FD
Just a heads up I think her name is spelled Breonna[0]. Not a knock against
the rest of your post, I like it.

[0]:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Breonna_Taylor](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Breonna_Taylor)

~~~
TaylorAlexander
Thank you, that was my mistake. My comment is too old for me to edit but I
will make sure to get this right next time. Solidarity!

------
xfitm3
This is fantastic! I hope other cities follow suit and the restoration of
civil liberties continues.

> The NYPD’s use of DAS is not restricted to suspected criminals or
> terrorists, and the collected data is retained for upwards of years.

This is concerning, too. I'd like to see some sort of federal requirement
prohibiting agencies from storing data including metadata for excessive
periods of time. I don't know what a reasonable limit would be but it should
probably be on the order of months.

------
WarOnPrivacy
I'm glad that NYC's dystopic Domain Awareness system gets some coverage here.

However it's curious that Microsoft isn't mentioned at all in the article -
even though every inch of this abomination is entirely Microsoft's creation.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Awareness_System](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_Awareness_System)

~~~
mcshay79
That "system" seems to be bleeding into every American street. What do you
make of the white square facing right at the top right of the image? What is
that one "sensing"?

~~~
mleonhard
I would guess that it's an antenna.

------
Dicey84
Thinking on the other side of the fence, I wonder if certain vendors will now
refuse to sell to NYPD, as this mandatory disclosure would likely cause issues
with the NDA's and End Use conditions of sale..?

Im sure some companies wouldn't be to excited on having their tech publicly
exposed.

~~~
vertex-four
Honestly? Good. If we can't verify how the tech is used, there's no possible
oversight of the police.

------
blackrock
How is this even a thing?

Why do civilian lawmakers even need to pass laws for this?

The police should be reporting their technologies, their techniques, and their
standard operating processes to a civilian oversight board.

Otherwise, the police are operating above the law.

Well, we already know that they do. But still, the police department must fall
under legal civilian control.

Otherwise, you will end up with a militarized police system, that is
accountable to no one but themselves. They end up becoming the foxes that
guards the henhouse.

------
0xcde4c3db
I'm probably behind the curve on this a bit, but in addition to surveillance
infrastructure directly controlled by the police (which this bill seems to
target), are they not also using third-party adtech to build profiles of
"likely customers"? If not, will this convince them to start?

------
geichel
Anyone else read this with The Wire (TV show) theme in their head?
[https://youtu.be/K3rZgs3dudI](https://youtu.be/K3rZgs3dudI)

------
SN76477
Doesn't all surveillance require a warrant?

~~~
godzillabrennus
For it to be admissible in court.

Most people can’t afford an attorney and end up taking a plea.

~~~
gruez
Actually, there's a "good faith" (aka. "ignorance of the law") exception for
cops. So even a lawyer might not be able to save you.

[https://www.justia.com/criminal/procedure/search-and-
seizure...](https://www.justia.com/criminal/procedure/search-and-seizure-
rules/the-good-faith-exception/)

>A mistake of law by a police officer sometimes can trigger the exception. If
an officer takes steps based on the existing interpretation of the law, but a
court later rules that the law should be interpreted differently, they may be
found to have acted in good faith.

~~~
jdsully
Your mainstream explanation isn't correct. This only applies when a court
replaces an existing precedent - a relatively rare occurrence. Police
shouldn't be expected to anticipate the court's change of heart ahead of time.

------
dflock
Or you could just not give them millions upon millions of dollars to buy all
this military crap in the first place.

~~~
Rebelgecko
You can do ALPR at a decent level with $100 of hardware. The cost of doing
surveillance isn't necessarily going to be a lot

~~~
geofft
Plus a good amount of technical know-how and ops work, which is only free if
you're a hobbyist building a proof of concept. If you're the actual NYPD and
you want it to work accurately and reliably in prod, you need budget for
either in-house tech talent or a company that will do it for you.

~~~
Rebelgecko
True. A city near me paid about $350k for a few dozen ALPR cameras at major
intersections. Not a bad price for near total surveillance of every vehicle
traveling in and out of town

~~~
jacobush
How do you feel about that?

[https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=SECu1fR0dWE&t...](https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=SECu1fR0dWE&t=60)

------
ncmncm
Let's see someone prosecuted for not revealing one.

------
DataWorker
We have way too many lawyers.

