Subsidising and rewarding active citizenship and participation in encrypted security footage (e.g. dashcams)

Let's get the government to subsidise dashboard cameras and give financial incentives to report dangerous driving (even if it is just waiving road user charges for a year).
Then let's do the same for body cameras (maybe with footage encrypted with a key that only law enforcement can decrypt).

If it's encrypted so that only certain trusted parties together with two keys can decrypt, with one held by police, and another by some body that is entirely independent of and somewhat distrusts police (e.g., for example, people historically disproportionately persecuted by police e.g. in Tuhoe land, Tuhoe leaders), or perhaps just the one key held by non-police, then we can be more assured about data sovereignty, joint sovereignty and ownership on a somewhat community level. Encouraging active citizenship and partnership in a basic need (security) that would otherwise be monopolised by a single state body, creating a single point of failure as was demonstrated in 2007.

Why the contribution is important

Democratising ownership of the means of security is directly in opposition to the centralisation of security in police states, the abuse of power.
Giving ownership over the rights of releasing the surveillance to ordinary citizens means they can also record and release footage of police abuses as well, equalising the current disproportionate amount of control that central governments have over it. Who will police the police - well, here, my proposal allows ordinary citizens to help police police. Why should only police wear body cameras?
It's not a competition either - we can provide complementary footage, and, we also have the means of providing a competing narrative if the police try some bullshit "the camera wasn't working at the time lol" thing.

With how Operation 8 was conducted, with the editor of the newspaper fed misinformation and the police declining to prosecute themselves for it (refer to the 2011 documentary for some specific examples), it's difficult to have full faith in the full integrity of the upper management and the culture of self-preservation of reputation and careful curation of cherry-picked surveillance information (e.g. they cut out the part about catapulting a bus onto some world leaders, keeping the suspicious-sounding words instead). What's changed since the documentary came out? Are the same people still in management positions? If so, there need to be more eyes on those eyes on us.

by land077 on July 19, 2021 at 10:39PM

Current Rating

Average rating: 0.0
Based on: 0 votes