The US police are increasingly relying on artificial intelligence (AI) tools to fight crime, but critics argue that these machines are often used to perpetuate injustice and automate existing biases in policing. The use of AI facial recognition technology has led to numerous false leads, with many innocent people being arrested miles away from the alleged crime scene. These incidents disproportionately target people of color.
While proponents of AI argue that it provides an objective authority, critics contend that this ignores the fact that AI knowledge is based on data learned from the past and predicts future events without human judgment. This can exacerbate existing biases in policing, particularly against working-class Black and brown communities. The automation of surveillance can also lead to a lack of accountability, with police forces deflecting accusations of targeting specific groups by citing the objective dictates of AI.
Some AI tools are being used to justify deploying more officers in already militarized areas, further entrenching poverty and inequality. Transcription tools like Axon's "Draft One" have been criticized for introducing cognitive laziness into the legal record, with potentially misleading or inaccurate information becoming permanent.
A recent audit found that only 8-20% of alerts from ShotSpotter, a gunshot activity sensor used by the New York City Police Department, actually matched with real shootings. However, the company behind ShotSpotter claims an accuracy rate of 97%, which is disputed by critics who point to the lack of physical evidence.
Despite these concerns, many police departments are eager to adopt AI tools as a way to claim modernity and efficiency. Some companies like Flock Safety have made millions of dollars from the ballooning demand for mass surveillance tools.
Critics argue that the lack of transparency around AI acquisitions and contracts between police departments and private capital is exacerbating the problem. The NYPD has been criticized for dragging its heels in releasing information about its surveillance arsenal, despite passing legislation requiring greater oversight.
The use of AI raises fundamental questions about corporate intellectual property rights versus citizen's rights to privacy and due process. Critics argue that the "black box" nature of AI systems creates a conflict between private interests and public trust, with sensitive personal information being outsourced to companies whose obligation is to shareholders, not the public.
Ultimately, some critics believe that relying on advanced technology to solve complex social problems like policing is a false promise that cannibalizes resources for more effective solutions, such as healthcare, affordable housing, education. As one critic noted, "the idea of modernity and efficiency has been used to justify a lot of expensive promises that don't deliver."
While proponents of AI argue that it provides an objective authority, critics contend that this ignores the fact that AI knowledge is based on data learned from the past and predicts future events without human judgment. This can exacerbate existing biases in policing, particularly against working-class Black and brown communities. The automation of surveillance can also lead to a lack of accountability, with police forces deflecting accusations of targeting specific groups by citing the objective dictates of AI.
Some AI tools are being used to justify deploying more officers in already militarized areas, further entrenching poverty and inequality. Transcription tools like Axon's "Draft One" have been criticized for introducing cognitive laziness into the legal record, with potentially misleading or inaccurate information becoming permanent.
A recent audit found that only 8-20% of alerts from ShotSpotter, a gunshot activity sensor used by the New York City Police Department, actually matched with real shootings. However, the company behind ShotSpotter claims an accuracy rate of 97%, which is disputed by critics who point to the lack of physical evidence.
Despite these concerns, many police departments are eager to adopt AI tools as a way to claim modernity and efficiency. Some companies like Flock Safety have made millions of dollars from the ballooning demand for mass surveillance tools.
Critics argue that the lack of transparency around AI acquisitions and contracts between police departments and private capital is exacerbating the problem. The NYPD has been criticized for dragging its heels in releasing information about its surveillance arsenal, despite passing legislation requiring greater oversight.
The use of AI raises fundamental questions about corporate intellectual property rights versus citizen's rights to privacy and due process. Critics argue that the "black box" nature of AI systems creates a conflict between private interests and public trust, with sensitive personal information being outsourced to companies whose obligation is to shareholders, not the public.
Ultimately, some critics believe that relying on advanced technology to solve complex social problems like policing is a false promise that cannibalizes resources for more effective solutions, such as healthcare, affordable housing, education. As one critic noted, "the idea of modernity and efficiency has been used to justify a lot of expensive promises that don't deliver."
. It's like they're trying to solve complex social problems but all it does is perpetuate more injustice 
. These machines are just reflecting the biases we already have, and now they're being used to target people of color even more 
. And don't even get me started on the lack of transparency around these contracts between police and private companies 
. It's like they're outsourcing our rights as citizens to make a quick buck 
. We need to be careful here, AI might seem modern and efficient but it's not solving anything when all it does is automate more problems 
.
I mean, we're literally using machines to make decisions on our lives and it's all based on data from the past... like what even is that? 
And have you seen those AI facial recognition tools? Total mess! 
Innocent people getting arrested left and right, just because of their skin tone or where they live. It's like, can't we do better than this?
We're losing sight of what's really important here. Let's focus on solving real problems, like poverty and inequality, instead of outsourcing them to machines 
. But then again, proponents of AI are saying that it's all about objectivity and fairness... and isn't that a pretty lofty goal to aim for? 
Either way, I think we need to be super careful when implementing new tech in policing, 'cause the stakes are so high 
(Or would it just create new problems down the line?) 
. I mean, yeah we need to keep our communities safe but this is just perpetuating more problems. People of color are already at a disadvantage, and now AI is just making it worse by giving the police an excuse to target them even more. And what's with all these 'accidents' when it comes to accuracy rates? 8-20%? That's crazy! 
. The NYPD is being super shady about their surveillance arsenal too, it's like they're trying to hide something. I'm all for modernizing policing and finding new ways to solve problems, but this AI stuff feels like a bunch of hype to me 
. We should be investing in real solutions that actually help people, not just lining the pockets of corporate execs 
.
. I mean, who thought it was a good idea to give machines with a 97% accuracy rate (yeah right 
) the power to identify bad guys? It's like relying on Siri to get me out of a tight spot - not gonna end well.
The real problem is that these AI tools are being used to justify more officers in already militarized areas - because nothing says 'fair policing' like throwing more bodies at the problem 
.
It's like we're trading one injustice for another.
.
. And what really gets my goat is that police departments are more worried about being modern and efficient than actually addressing the root causes of crime and inequality.
. "Hey, let's use AI to solve our problems!" Yeah, because that's exactly how it works... in theory 
. We need to be investing in real solutions like healthcare, affordable housing, education - not just some fancy AI tool that's just gonna perpetuate existing biases and inequalities 
. what's even crazier is that some companies are making bank off this 
. we need to be careful not to confuse corporate interests with what's best for society 
.
. It's like they're trying to automate bad policing instead of fixing the root problems. The fact that it's perpetuating biases against ppl of color is a major red flag 
.
and cause so much harm to innocent ppl 
. Innocent people get arrested miles away from the crime scene 
around AI acquisitions & contracts, stat! 
and poverty 
. We should invest in healthcare, housing & education instead 
. AI is not the answer 
. Like, I get that technology can be super helpful, but we gotta make sure it's not perpetuating the same old problems we're trying to solve 
.
. And can we please, for the love of all things good, get some better data on these AI systems? This "black box" nonsense is giving me the heebie-jeebies 
. We need to rethink our reliance on tech and focus on actual community policing instead 
. We need more transparency and oversight, not less 
.
. Let's get back to basics: human judgment, community engagement, and a real commitment to justice