To the Editor:
“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.” — Benjamin Franklin
Old-glory wavers, flag-pin wearers, pocket-Constitution carriers, full-throated Second Amendment proponents — where are you now? As the Syracuse Common Council insists on adopting corporate surveillance solutions instead of investing in real-world community policing, our Fourth Amendment rights are under threat.
On Monday, the Syracuse Common Council voted to approve a new contract with public security mega-corporation Axon for license-plate monitoring cameras and software. This follows the debacle with the previous provider, Flock, in which millions of data points on Syracuse drivers were exposed nationwide and searched without warrants or due process. Apparently, “fool me once” was not enough for the Common Council. With paper-thin guarantees from police officials and corporate representatives, Syracuse has once again placed its trust — and our rights — in the hands of a corporation that seeks nothing less than total capture of public safety services and, ultimately, the privatization of police functions.
Axon and Flock enable police to sidestep Fourth Amendment protections by routing surveillance through private companies and big data systems. Everyone captured by these systems is subjected to scrutiny and suspicion without meaningful constitutional safeguards. Your protection against unreasonable search and seizure is not preserved simply because you are innocent. Police assure the Common Council that proper procedures govern access to this data, but such assurances ring hollow given the numerous documented abuses of similar systems across jurisdictions nationwide.
As for the police departments advocating for these technologies, they may be lobbying for their own obsolescence. These companies market comprehensive “public safety suites” and present themselves as total policing solutions — even promoting AI systems capable of drafting police reports for use in court. It feels less like public safety and more like a real-time episode of “Black Mirror.”
At the same time they request these tools, the Syracuse Police Department has failed to provide meaningful data regarding return on investment, serious due diligence on information security, or any substantial justification beyond “trust us.”
The department’s recent update citing five to seven cases over three years in which license plate readers were relevant was a weak attempt at justification. Why are the cases redacted? If there were convictions, there is no compelling reason to obscure them. Redaction prevents the public from evaluating whether the scanners were truly integral to those cases. Once again, it comes down to “trust us.” Why should we accept that without thorough review?
A community in which police receive everything they request without limitation or oversight, where practices and outcomes are obscured, and where scrutiny is discouraged, risks becoming a police state.
Are Syracuse police public safety advocates, or security technology sales representatives? These tools promote arm’s-length policing — detached from human connection and community engagement. We are losing sight of each other’s humanity. It is time for Syracuse Police to invest more in community relationships rather than surveillance infrastructure.
The city of Syracuse stumbled badly with Flock. Why should Axon be any different? It operates in the same sector, follows the same “total solution” business model, and presents the same risks of insufficient oversight and abuse. Do we need another investigative report to realize we are being sold the same illusion of security? When will we acknowledge that our data is the true product being sold?
Under this agreement, our data becomes a commodity in a shortsighted, profit-driven exchange of privacy for shareholder value. And it will not end here. Companies tasked with safeguarding our information will always seek more revenue, more control, more data — and more replacement of public policing with private surveillance solutions. That is their business model.
Please consider what we are willing to sacrifice for convenience. Consider the rights we surrender in response to fear. Contact your Common Councilor and let them know how you feel about the erosion of those rights.
Ryan Garcia Kendrick
Fayetteville