What Harm Can a Little More Surveillance Do?

We’re feeling a bit skeptical, this week, about allowing private technology companies access to our private information. No, we’re not talking about Elon Musk and DOGE accessing our personal information, but another, more local concern.

Earlier this month, the Bend Police Department sent out a press release inviting the public to take part in “Connect Bend, a community camera registry designed to leverage existing privately owned camera systems throughout our community to help officers respond to incidents more quickly and effectively,” according to the release.

The basic premise sounds reasonable: Let the police have access to your surveillance cameras, either on demand, or by participating in a registry that allows them to understand where cameras are located, all in the name of helping them solve crimes faster. It might sound innocuous and helpful on its face, but we’re concerned about the potential for abuse.

When a crime happens, officers already go around to area homes or businesses that might have had surveillance cameras in use to try to gather evidence. The current procedure is more tedious. Each time, officers have to scan the area where the crime occurred to determine where they might get help through video evidence. Under the system proposed, locals can volunteer to give up at least some measure of privacy in order to make the process more streamlined. So far, Bend Police report that some 365 entities have already signed up.

Not only is there a concern about the fact that the system relies on the trust of a private company, which supplies the technology, but also about the potential future interpretations of what could be considered a crime. Oregon’s sanctuary laws currently prevent law enforcement officials from cooperating with immigration proceedings — unless compelled by court order. Does it seem inconceivable, given the blitzkrieg of revisionary statues at the federal level which are challenging due process, that sanctuary laws in states like ours could also be corrupted?

If you’re less concerned about something like this being used for ill means in the immigration realm, surely you’re imaginative enough to consider video surveillance being used in other ways that violate people’s privacy, or worse. Many of us have read Orwell.

But if you’re all in on more surveillance, then maybe you’ll be thrilled to know that your voluntary participation requires the purchase of a device from a private company. [Clarification: added 2/20 @6:39 pm: Participating in the camera registry does not require a purchase; only the portion of the program that allows users to integrate their cameras with fusus technology.] “Interested community members and private businesses can purchase a fususCORE device that plugs into your existing camera system and allows the Bend Police Department conditional access to your camera feed in case of an emergency at or near your location. Camera access and settings are controlled by the camera owner.”

Sure, if you say so.

It may very well be that Bend PD itself has no ill intentions whatsoever, and that it will indeed help make our community safer. But given the many ways that public data has been accessed and put under potential threat in recent weeks, count us among the skeptics who will continue to remain adherents to a more restrained system.

This article appears in The Source Weekly February 20, 2025.