Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionsNational securityStarted 6mos agoActive 2wks ago

Should the government use facial recognition technology for mass surveillance to enhance public safety?

Facial recognition technology uses software to identify individuals based on their facial features, and can be used to monitor public spaces and enhance security measures. Proponents argue that it enhances public safety by identifying and preventing potential threats, and helps in locating missing persons and criminals. Opponents argue that it infringes on privacy rights, can lead to misuse and discrimination, and raises significant ethical and civil liberties concerns.

70 Replies

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...6mos6MO

No

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...6mos6MO

Yes

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

Do you think facial recognition could make your community safer, or would it just make you feel more controlled?

 @9V4BD7Bfrom British Columbia  answered…2mos2MO

It wouldn’t make me feel safer because with AI, people can create other people’s faces and go through recognition without it being the real
person.

 @9V28522New Democraticfrom British Columbia  answered…2mos2MO

No, I feel as if we had facial recognition I would feel more controlled like robots. Instead we can continue to use ID's.

 @9V27SQHfrom Ontario  answered…2mos2MO

The Facial Recognition carries pros about the countries security. People can easily identify to use of the governmental facilities. Moreover, government can get a report of their citizens and manage the system.

 @9V27Y74from British Columbia  answered…2mos2MO

I would feel more controlled because we are not robots and do not need facial recognition. We can use other ways to identify others such as Ids, passports, drivers license etc.

 @9RKDWR4from Ontario  answered…4mos4MO

Only technology that specifically, and only recognizes the faces of wanted criminals, suspected terrorists etc, not technology that recognizes the face of every citizen.

 @9RFSJMHIndependentfrom New Brunswick  answered…4mos4MO

at very limited degree and absolutely bar private uses

 @9RCQVYVLiberalfrom New Brunswick  answered…4mos4MO

The technology is not proven and in most cases is wrong on racial profiles

 @9RBXNLDfrom Quebec  answered…4mos4MO

In theory it's great, but I can't see it being used appropriately.

 @9QZCYDNfrom Ontario  answered…4mos4MO

I think they should use the technology but they shouldn't have mass surveillance on everyone all the time

 @9QTMDJTConservativefrom Ontario  answered…4mos4MO

No, not until facial recognition is more constant and doesn't mess up/miss-ID people.

 @9QQG9Z8from Ontario  answered…4mos4MO

No, people will just find other ways to bypass this.

 @9P8NRFMNew Democratic from Alberta  answered…5mos5MO

Yes, but this should not be the only method of identification. For example, in order to participate in Canadian elections the voter must present at least two different forms of identification that contain the individual's name, date of birth, address, etc.

 @9NK2RH9from Alberta  answered…5mos5MO

For areas of high-risk (i.e., Airports, government buildings,)

 @9NGVW5Nfrom British Columbia  answered…5mos5MO

The seems like it would turn into a privacy thing where everyone would end up having their privacy violated

 @9MV4GBFfrom Ontario  answered…6mos6MO

I think they should do it but only for criminal detection software, like if someone commited a crime in the past, their face should be added to a list for detection and reconnasenice for criminal behavior

 @9MSXW7RNew Democraticfrom Ontario  answered…6mos6MO

Yes, as long as the private information of the public should stay private

 @9XPF7TCNew Democraticanswered…2wks2W

As long as the system can only recognize the faces of wanted criminals or missing persons and doesn't collect any facial data.

 @9WGXHQLfrom Ontario  answered…3wks3W

They should accuse facial recognition for the roads where the lights are but they shouldn't have that if there's no lights and there's just houses.

 @9W9YG5Kfrom Nova Scotia  answered…4wks4W

No, and legislate a law that disallows using facial recognition for mass surveillance, as this violates everyone's privacy.

 @9VSPPZLfrom Saskatchewan  answered…1mo1MO

like ai this should only be used in goverment facilities and (if the business allows it) businesses around the world.

 @9TD8FMRfrom British Columbia  answered…2mos2MO

Maybe, this is something I'm on the fence about. On one hand it would help a lot with identifying those that do crime but on the other I personally and I'm sure others feel like this, it would feel like an invasion of privacy.

 @9S9R2T4from British Columbia  answered…3mos3MO

This could be the worst thing that you could do to a country of freedom. Have a look at any country that has incorporated this and you sure would not wanna live there.

 @9RZPX67from Alberta  answered…3mos3MO

no, especially what happened during the freedom convoy in 2022

 @9RW65Z4from Ontario  answered…3mos3MO

Yes, But only to match faces to Identification Cards for purposes of missing people

 @9RQNPMRfrom Nova Scotia  answered…4mos4MO

Yes but with caveats to ensure that is all it is used for

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

If facial recognition could prevent crimes but also gathered information on innocent people, would that be an acceptable trade-off?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

What might be the impact of facial recognition technology on people who are unfairly treated or targeted in society?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

In a world where every public camera could recognize you, do you feel more secure or more vulnerable?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

How would you respond if someone else benefited from facial recognition, but it violated your own privacy or values?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

Do you believe there should be limits on when and where technology like this is used, and if so, what should those limits be?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

Can you imagine a situation where facial recognition might help you in a positive way, and if so, what would that scenario look like?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

How would you feel if every time you walked into a public place, your face was instantly recognized and logged?

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2 days2D

No, this would be too expensive to implement

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2 days2D

No, I trust the technology but not the humans that could misuse it

 @9TSTBDYfrom British Columbia  answered…2mos2MO

This is not of importance to me as I remain politically neutral

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2 days2D

Yes, but only if it’s tightly regulated and used with transparency

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2 days2D

Yes, but only targeting criminal hotspots to protect vulnerable communities

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

How do you balance the need for safety with the risk of compromising personal freedom if such technology becomes widespread?

 @ISIDEWITHasked…2mos2MO

Who should be held responsible if facial recognition technology is used to discriminate or unfairly target individuals?

 @ISIDEWITHDiscuss this answer...2 days2D

No, it sets a dangerous precedent for government control over citizens

Demographics

Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion

Loading data...

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2 days2D

No One’s Safe: Trump’s ‘Border Czar’ Homan Promises Sweeping Deportation Operation

TOM COTTON is slated to be the chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee, putting “I think mass deportation is just talk, but the era of open borders will be over,” Scott McConnell, a co-founder of The American Conservative, wrote on X. In July a Mexican-born Trump backer told The Times, “Last time, he didn’t even finish the wall. What’s he going to do this time?”Now the answer is taking shape: He’s going to oversee a militarized mass roundup of the undocumented. On Sunday, Trump named Tom Homan, his former acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, as “border czar.”In a speech to this year’s National Conservatism Conference, Homan, who oversaw Trump’s family separation policy, promised a “historic deportation operation” from which no undocumented immigrant would be safe. “No one’s off the table in the next administration,” he said. “If you’re here illegally, you better be looking over your shoulder.”Then, on Monday, Trump named the obsessively anti-immigrant Stephen Miller as his deputy chief of staff. Miller’s portfolio, Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan reported in The Times, “is expected to be vast and to far exceed what the eventual title will convey.” Miller has been forthright about his desire to purge immigrants here illegally, as well as many here legally, from the United States.Among other things, Miller has said that Trump would cancel the temporary protected status of thousands of Afghans who fled here after the Taliban’s takeover and take another stab at ending DACA, the program that protects from deportation some immigrants brought to the United States as children.Most significantly, he’s laid out plans to use National Guard troops to help arrest migrants en masse, warehousing them in military camps while they await deportation. No one should be shocked when this happens. I suspect some will be anyway.

▲  2811 replies