In recent years, the use of live facial recognition technology (LFRT) by law enforcement agencies has become increasingly controversial. While proponents argue that it is an effective tool for identifying and capturing criminals, critics raise concerns about the potential for abuse, bias, and infringement on civil liberties. This issue has come to the forefront in the UK, where police have deployed LFRT in marked vans on high streets in city centers. This article critically analyzes the use of LFRT in this context, highlighting its potential perils.

Firstly, it is essential to understand how LFRT works. The technology uses cameras and algorithms to capture images of people’s faces in real-time and compare them to a database of known individuals. If a match is found, the police can apprehend the person. However, the technology is not foolproof and can generate false positives. This can lead to innocent people being wrongfully arrested, causing significant harm to their lives.

Furthermore, the use of LFRT raises significant concerns about privacy and civil liberties. The technology can be used to track individuals’ movements without their knowledge or consent, raising questions about the government’s right to surveil citizens. In a democracy, citizens have the right to live free from constant surveillance, and the use of LFRT may infringe upon this right.

Another concern is the potential for bias in LFRT’s algorithm. Research has shown that the technology has higher error rates for people with darker skin tones and women, making them more likely to be falsely identified as a suspect. This raises significant issues of discrimination and unfair treatment, and the police must ensure that the technology is not used in a way that perpetuates existing biases.

Moreover, the use of LFRT in marked vans on high streets in city centers can have significant psychological impacts on individuals. People may feel intimidated and threatened by the presence of the police, which can lead to feelings of anxiety and mistrust. This can damage the relationship between the police and the community, making it harder to build trust and cooperation.

In conclusion, the deployment of LFRT by police in marked vans on high streets in city centers is a cause for significant concern. While the technology may be useful in identifying and capturing criminals, its potential perils must be carefully considered. The police must ensure that the technology is used in a way that respects individuals’ privacy and civil liberties, minimizes the risk of bias, and does not harm the relationship between the police and the community. Failure to do so could have significant consequences for the trust and cooperation between citizens and law enforcement, which are essential for a functioning democracy.