News & Commentary

The San Francisco Police Commission may not approve surveillance cameras unless it finds that the potential for deterrence outweighs community concerns. The San Francisco Police Commission approved 25 new surveillance cameras around the city despite the fact that there was no evidence for the potential for deterrence and dozens of people came to the Police Commission meeting to voice their opposition.

Privacy is definitely back on the National agenda. In case you missed some of these stories, here is a little run-down on recent activities in Washington.

San Francisco just announced it has finalized its contract with Earthlink/Google.

The Police Commission is about to decide whether to install 25 new surveillance cameras in locations around San Francisco, including multiple cameras at 24th and Mission and 16th and Mission.

The Commission has supported the installation of cameras because it says "the community wants them."

On Wednesday, November 15, the San Francisco Police Commission voted to expand the City's video surveillance program to an additional six locations. The Commission approved the expansion over objections raised by ACLU of Northern California regarding inadequate notice to the community, privacy concerns, and the failure of the City to provide any evidence that cameras are an effective deterrent, as required by San Francisco Administrative Code.

While studies from around the world show that video surveillance is not effective in preventing or reducing violent crime, another Northern California city is moving to install cameras. The City of Sacramento Police announced yesterday that it was starting a "pilot program" to install public video surveillance- claiming it will help make the community safer.

The City of Sacramento Police Department Press Release (click here)

Capital Public Radio Story (click here)

Read more about ineffective and intrusive public video surveillance here.

In the News:

High-Tech Companies to Push for Data-Privacy. Microsoft Corp., Hewlett-Packard Co. and other high-tech companies are preparing to push for data-privacy legislation next year to replace what they consider an outdated patchwork of state and federal laws that are inconsistent and burdensome. "We think the time has come for a comprehensive privacy bill that would protect consumers' personal information while still allowing the flow of information needed for commerce online," said Ira Rubinstein, a Microsoft lawyer. Gigalaw.

Do you live, work, or walk around 16th and Mission?

If you don't let the Police Commission know that you do not want public video cameras put up that will m

Very disappointing news – despite strong support from up and down the state and across the aisle and thousands of letters sent by constituents, the Governor vetoed the RFID bill.