Reflect on the examples of current technologies used by law enforcement to do their jobs, such as automated report systems, body worn cameras, and electronic weapons.
Begin by reviewing the video links addressing technology from former SDPD chief Zimmerman in your course Libguide (pasted below).
Then, prepare a policy memo outlining a new technology that you feel the local police department would benefit from.
Include the following in your policy memo: 
Explain the technology and why you feel it would be beneficial. 
Discuss the costs and the benefits of the technology.
Explain how your proposed technology fits into former chief Zimmerman’s narrative, such as constitutional and privacy issues. 
Length: 2 to 3-page policy memo, not including title and reference pages
References: Support your assignment with at least 2 scholarly resources.
Lesson 3.2: Technology and Law Enforcement 
As we increase the technological capabilities of the police, the potential for abuse increases. Some would argue that the more technological tools available to the police (and the government they represent), the less freedom we are likely to experience. Will there come a time when nothing we do is private? Will all our behavior be recorded, with or without our knowledge? If we stop and think about this possibility, we realize that we have taken several steps in exactly this direction. Our behavior is now recorded when we fill our gasoline tanks, use credit or debit cards, shop in retail stores, bank in person, bank or purchase online, enter government buildings, are watching sports events, and when we enter gated communities. What happens to all this data? Who has access to it? Who will protect us from its misuse? These and other questions should concern us greatly as we attempt to preserve a democratic society. 
While all of these technological advances help the police become more effective and efficient in the performance of their duties, it would be a mistake to think the police are the only ones making such advances. Those involved in criminal behavior are moving ahead as well. In the case of computer crimes, for example, the police have essentially been playing catch-up for the past decade or more. Further, some of the advantages of technology give us a false sense of security. None of them performs perfectly at all times under all circumstances. A good example is that of DNA profiling which never tells the police, a judge, or a judge and jury, who committed a crime, but simply rules out a large number of individuals as potential suspects (providing, of course, the evidence was properly collected and processed). While all these tools have the potential to make police work more precise, they can face challenges in court on various grounds. They are another tool for professional law enforcement, but a tool that must be used with skill and understanding. 
The advances in technology over the past 20 years have made getting away with crime more difficult. Technology has changed the way we police for many years and overall has improved efficiency and transparency in our agencies. It has also raised privacy concerns, not to mention, it often has a significant price tag attached. Body-worn cameras, less-than-lethal use-of-force technologies, license plate readers, facial recognition, radio communication systems, and social media require a legal and pragmatic review of policies, practices, and procedures before deploying them into the field. The International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) technology policy framework outlines the universal principles that guide law enforcement agencies’ use of technology. These principles include the specification of use; policies and procedures; privacy and data quality; data minimization and limitation; performance evaluation; transparency and notice; security; data retention; and auditing and accountability. 
Technology is transforming police work in the 21st century — introducing new tools to fight crime and new categories of crime to fight. For example, while more and more police departments across the country are deploying drones as eyes in the sky, the FBI reports they are also being used for criminal activities.
Examples of These Technologies
In around 2016, these technologies were just rolling out across agencies. Now, with the rapid pace of technological developments, agencies are finding new and innovative ways to leverage these tools to enhance public safety, catch criminals and save lives. You will now explore several technologies in further detail.
Digital Forensic Software  
This type of software is used to find, recover, and preserve digital evidence that’s often associated with electronic crimes, such as credit card fraud or child pornography. But many non-electronic crimes also include digital evidence, such as bank account information, phone numbers, emails, text messages, and social media posts. Digital forensic software has special capabilities, such as identifying and recovering hidden (or deleted files), performing complicated searches, and determining the contents of a file beyond the file extension (.doc, .pdf, etc.).
Information Sharing Technology 
Communication among law enforcement agencies has always been a challenge, but certain types of technology are helping to bridge the gap so everyone is on the same page. One of the goals of the Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate  is to “fund projects that help state and local response agencies share timely information about emergencies with each other and the public.” A few of these include the Next-Generation Incident Command System  and Wireless Emergency Alerts .
Virtual Reality Training
Virtual reality (VR) training for law enforcement provides a safe, immersive experience that simulates real-life behavior and scenarios as much as possible. It also demonstrates to potential officers that a department or agency is serious about the latest innovations and educational tools, which can help with recruiting. For example, VR training is now being used for new recruits in the Pulaski County Sheriff’s Office in Arkansas. The flexibility of the system allows officers to vary scenarios and settings to include shopping malls, neighborhoods, and schools. For instance, at the Tequesta Police Department in Florida, officers use VR tools to practice responding to hostage and active shooter situations and help individuals in mental distress.
eCitations and Mobile Printers
Advances in technology now make it possible for law enforcement officers to issue citations without spending precious minutes filling out paperwork by hand. Here’s how the process works: The officer uses a device to scan the barcode on the driver’s license. The information populates a citation, which the officer prints using a mobile printer. The officer can also send the citation to the courthouse digitally, all of which saves time, increases efficiency, and reduces errors. In one successful example, the police department in Olathe, Kansas switched to this technology, decreasing the time it takes to issue a citation from 15 to 20 minutes to 2 to 3 minutes.
Facial Recognition Software
Image of facial recognition technology scanning over a person’s eye.
One of the more controversial emerging police technologies involves the use of facial recognition software. When this tool first made its way into law enforcement repertoires, many were concerned that it would be used unethically. Thankfully, this has not been the case, and facial recognition is proving to be an effective investigative tool.
The goal of using facial recognition software is to improve safety and security in a number of instances. NYPD officers were able to find and arrest a rape suspect within 24 hours of the attack using facial recognition software. And, because facial recognition is so promising, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security predicts that it will be used on 97 percent of travelers by 2023. 
Biometrics
Police have been using fingerprints to identify people for more than a century. Now, in addition to facial recognition and DNA, there is an ever-expanding array of biometric (and behavioral) characteristics being utilized by law enforcement and the intelligence community. These include voice recognition, palmprints, wrist veins, iris recognition, gait analysis, and even heartbeats.
The FBI has developed a database called the Next Generation Identification (NGI) system, “which provides the criminal justice community with the world’s largest and most efficient electronic repository of biometric and criminal history information.”
With comprehensive electronic databases now in place to use DNA and other biometric data more effectively in law enforcement, even the use of fingerprints to identify suspects has gone high-tech. For example, a CNBC report explains how police in London can now use a mobile INK (Identity Not Known) biometrics device to scan a suspect’s fingerprints and in many cases reveal their identity within 60 seconds.
Voice Technology
An officer’s patrol car is like a mobile command center, meaning there are numerous computers and tools that an officer can use while on the road. But because there are so many different features, multitasking safely can be difficult. One of the latest innovations being incorporated into police cars is a new voice command technology that empowers officers to control many functions in their vehicle while driving and performing other patrol duties.
The capabilities of these voice systems vary from vehicle to vehicle, but most can handle commands to run a license plate or turn on a siren. The more advanced and most promising capability of voice command technology in police cars will make filing reports much easier — officers can dictate their notes which are then logged directly into their agency’s RMS system.
Robots
Many law enforcement agencies are now using next-generation robotic cameras to deliver visual and audio surveillance of potential crime scenes that may be too dangerous or too hard for officers to reach. Some of these devices are even “throwable” (up to 120 feet and capable of withstanding repeated 30-foot drops) — powered by an electric motor and equipped with high-tech wheels that enable them to move, climb, and explore even the most challenging spaces while being operated wirelessly by a trained officer. 
Automaker Ford has filed a patent for a self-driving police car equipped with artificial intelligence. These high-tech cruisers are designed to catch violators of traffic laws or impaired drivers by transmitting information to human officers or carrying an optional passenger officer who could make arrests. 
Additional applications for using robots in police work, now and on the near horizon, include:
Ever-expanding capabilities for robots to gather surveillance information, take police reports and provide communications in settings where human officers’ safety would be compromised.
China’s ongoing development of an “AnBot” robot to patrol banks, airports, and schools.
Patrolling tourist attractions with a touchscreen-equipped robot officer, as is now on duty in Dubai.
Video Doorbells
Image of a Ring camera catching a porch thief.
Video doorbells have been installed by thousands of homeowners as a way to enhance home security and give them peace of mind. It turns out, though, these surveillance systems are also helping law enforcement when it comes to criminal investigations. In 2020 alone, law enforcement agencies across the U.S. made more than 20,000 requests last year for footage captured by Ring video doorbells and other home-security cameras. Amazon — which owns Ring — has entered into more than 2,000 cooperative agreements with law enforcement agencies, which allows them to automatically ask camera owners for their security footage if they live near a crime scene.
ShotSpotter
“Shots fired!” is not an uncommon dispatch from witnesses or officers on patrol, but pinpointing the exact location of the gunfire takes up precious time when every moment counts. Today, more and more cities are implementing ShotSpotter technology that uses sensors to detect gunfire and analysts to track the data and instantly relay it to police, enabling them to arrive on the scene more quickly than ever before.
Named for the leading provider of this technology — California-based ShotSpotter — the service can cost $40,000 to $60,000 per square mile per year for cities to cover high-crime areas. The company claims it can “detect 90%+ of gunfire incidents with a precise location in less than 60 seconds to significantly improve response times.”
A dramatic example of ShotSpotter in action took place in 2017 in Fresno, California, where police used it to apprehend a criminal on a killing spree. The technology enabled police to trace the killer’s movements and apprehend him in 4 minutes and 13 seconds.
Thermal Imaging
Thermal imaging has become an important police technology tool that is especially helpful in dark conditions. Thermal image cameras, some available as small hand-held units, utilize infrared imaging to detect heat emitted by such objects as humans and animals, and to deliver a “heat picture” or “heat map” of the environment in question.
As seen on any number of TV crime shows, it can be used to track the motion of suspects in a darkened building. Such technology has life-saving applications — from firefighting to search and rescue missions (for example, finding a lost child or senior citizen in a blinding snowstorm).
Artificial Intelligence
The ongoing expansion of the Internet of Things (IoT) means more data is being generated, collected, and analyzed than ever before — much of which can be incredibly valuable in a law enforcement context.
But the process of deriving actionable insights from immense amounts of data is so incredibly time-consuming that it is not remotely cost-effective when performed by humans. That’s where artificial intelligence (AI) and its subcategory machine learning come in. AI is used to support many other police technologies, including some of those mentioned above like ShotSpotter, facial recognition, and biometrics. It can also be used for crime mapping: crunching data that can be used to far more effectively pinpoint high-crime areas so police can monitor them more closely and deploy additional resources. 
Artificial intelligence is also being used for crime forecasting. Utilizing so-called deep learning algorithms, programmers can train computers to analyze data from a vast array of sources and categories to actually predict when and where crimes are likely to occur. This allows agencies to properly allocate resources and increases the likelihood that officers will be in the right place at the right time.
Automatic License Plate Recognition (ALPR)
The same technology that enables toll collectors to automatically scan and collect the registration numbers and letters on your license plate to charge you a fee is now being used by police for a variety of law enforcement purposes, from identifying stolen cars to catching up with people who have active warrants or monitoring “Amber Alerts.” However, the technology law enforcement uses for ALPR has taken another innovative step forward.
The latest in ALPR technology combines optical recognition technology with AI, allowing law enforcement to reliably and consistently identify license plates. Before the enhanced AI capability, some ALPR cameras provided low-resolution and blurry images, making proper identification difficult. With AI, ALPR cameras can identify “the make, model and color of cars even in low light and poor weather, distinguish individual characters on license plates, learn new plates as they appear and expand its database to include updated and unfamiliar designs” (POST, n.d.).
The reality that multiple cameras could be capturing images of the same license plate potentially gives police the ability to track a vehicle’s movements over time, revealing details about an operator’s whereabouts, which could obviously be helpful in catching criminals.
However, privacy advocates like the ACLU — asserting drivers are not voluntarily offering up detailed information on their comings and goings — warn that such powerful technology should be subject to restrictions and close monitoring to ensure it is not being abused. Many states and law enforcement agencies have put in place limitations on how this valuable technology is deployed.
Drones
Image of a police drone hovering over town.
Also called unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), drones are increasingly being used by police to gain aerial vantage points for crime scene work, search and rescue efforts, accident reconstruction, crowd monitoring, and more. Some of the more sophisticated models can be equipped with thermal imaging or 3D mapping software to offer GPS-enhanced precision to the areas being surveyed. Many police drones and UAVs are also equipped with zoom cameras, making them incredibly valuable for delivering actionable, real-time intel in high-risk, “armed and dangerous” situations.
Enhanced Body-Worn Cameras
Image of a body cam on an officer’s shirt.
Video of police officers doing their jobs in challenging situations used to be rare; today it is ubiquitous, as seen in a number of high-profile incidents that have drawn intense public and media scrutiny. As more cities and communities choose to equip police departments with body-worn cameras, the ability of law enforcement supervisors, as well as the public, to gain a street-level view of on-duty police work has expanded dramatically — setting in motion an ongoing debate around the importance and the impact of this technology.
In addition to being smaller, less cumbersome, and more durable, some body-worn cameras are designed to better integrate with in-car systems to provide synchronized video of an event from multiple points of view. Other advancements include higher resolution, clearer audio, wider fields of vision, and heightened resistance to environmental conditions such as extreme cold. 
Related technology now includes smart holsters that are designed to activate the body camera anytime the officer draws their firearm. At least one manufacturer of body-worn police technology makes a camera capable of issuing an alert when an officer is down. On the horizon: body-worn police cameras equipped with facial recognition capabilities.
The perceived benefits of using body-worn cameras include better evidence documentation and increased accountability and transparency by our officers. They also create concerns about privacy issues, data retention, public disclosure policies, and financial considerations. The costs of implementing body-worn cameras include not only the cost of the cameras but also of any ancillary equipment, data storage and management, training, administration, and disclosure. 
GPS Technology and Identification
Using GPS technology, police can pinpoint the location of a call and determine the fastest and safest route to it, getting people the help they need more efficiently and timely. Officers can record the location of crimes, and that information can be exported to maps to determine how enforcement efforts can better focus on decreasing the occurrences. GPS technology can help better plan for shift staffing and patrol assignments. GPS technology is used almost daily to prove or deny a suspect was at a specific location at a specific time; almost everyone has a smartphone that tracks our locations at all times. 
Major elements in every case are suspect identification, the confirmation of the identity of individuals for court appearances, inmate processing, visits to correctional facilities, death identifications (especially in the event of a critical incident), wants and warrants verification, sex offender tracking, criminal history checks, and queries across criminal justice information system databases all help officers do their jobs. DNA databases like CODDIS continue to improve, reducing the time and the backlog that once served as a major impediment to solving crimes. Other identification methods are based on facial, iris, voice, handwriting, and signature recognition. For example, this technology has improved the ability of all San Diego agencies to improve policing practices and build community trust and legitimacy, but its continued use and implementation must be built on a defined policy framework with the agency’s mission and communities’ well-being in mind.
DNA
Computerized image of the double helix, DNA.
Using DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) as an investigative tool has expanded dramatically over the past two decades. Nationally, the DNA Index System makes it possible for crime labs throughout the country to exchange and compare DNA profiles. National DNA Index System participants in February of 2004 included the FBI, U.S. Army, Puerto Rico, and all U.S. states except Mississippi (Jones, 2004). Further, all states have now legislatively mandated the establishment of DNA databases for law enforcement purposes. In the 1990s, several states passed laws to lay the foundation for DNA databases. These laws authorized the collection of biological samples from convicted sex offenders. Later efforts expanded to include samples from those convicted of violent crimes and burglary, and by the end of 2003, some 35 states required samples from all felons. Many states also require samples from certain juvenile offenders; some even require DNA for particular misdemeanor convictions (Jones, 2004). 
Recently there has been a revolution in biological evidence collection practice. Traditionally, biological samples included tissues and fluids, such as blood and semen. Now, a technique known as PCR (polymerase chain reaction) enables DNA analysis with biological samples from dental molds, cigarette butts, beverage cans, eating utensils, chewing gum, postage stamps, ski masks, licked envelopes, toothbrushes, razor shavings, band aids, and clothing. Even fingerprints can contain sufficient DNA for genetic profiling. In short, DNA evidence can be collected from virtually anywhere (Jones, 2004). Further, as little as one-billionth of a gram of DNA may be required for analysis, and PCR can be used with partially degraded samples making it possible to solve crimes that were once thought to be unsolvable. 
A DNA profile probability indicates the likelihood that a person chosen randomly from a certain population can provide the DNA profile of the sample obtained from the crime scene. Jones (2004) indicates that most, but not all, courts have upheld state DNA collection statutes on the grounds that a prisoner’s right to privacy is outweighed by the government’s interest in obtaining reliable DNA identification evidence to be included in a database for possible use in solving crimes. Courts have also decided that DNA laws authorize a reasonable search and seizure under the “special needs” exception to the Fourth Amendment’s warrant requirement. 
The FBI has developed a national database called the Combined Index System (CODIS) Program. This program employs two indices to generate leads in crimes where there is DNA evidence. The Convicted Offender Index contains over 1.5 million DNA profiles of individuals convicted of violent crimes, and the Forensic Index contains more than 75,000 DNA profiles from crime scene evidence (Jones, 2004). To use this program, local police departments and sheriff’s offices forward DNA profiles to state and national levels. States participating in the CODIS program all have a single State DNA Index System, which allows DNA profiles submitted by different laboratories within the state to be compared against each other (Jones, 2004). The results of these efforts are thousands of “matches,” which may help the police solve not only recent crimes but “cold” cases. 
Social Media
Image depicting various social media icons such as the Facebook logo.
The expanding field of social media holds a wealth of opportunity for police agencies in San Diego County, as long as it is operated safely and efficiently. This only can be accomplished if each of our departments takes the proper steps to create a comprehensive and well-thought-out social media policy. In October 2010, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) partnered with the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, and the Department of Justice to create the Center for Social Media. The IACP’s Center serves as a free source of information to assist law enforcement in developing and enhancing the use of social media, both departmental use and personal use. For our regional law enforcement agencies, social media has proved time and time again to be a crucial criminal justice tool in gathering intelligence, identifying suspects, locating evidence, and even helping screen candidates for employment. Numerous cases have been of police thwarting or solving crimes based on tips uncovered from Facebook, Instagram, Snap Chat, Twitter, Blogs, and Chat Rooms, and crimes have been successfully prosecuted due to videos posted to YouTube. Our departments also use it to enhance public relations, post crime-related information, and send community alerts. While social media clearly has potential as a crime-fighting tool, it also has a downside in that it can be used inappropriately and be counter-productive to what we are trying to accomplish, bringing with it the potential for harm to our agencies or our people. As such, important precautionary steps must not be overlooked. 
IACP research shows about 78% of agencies have a social media policy; all our agencies in San Diego have a policy and use social media in varying degrees. We are responsible for content we publish, send to others, or make available to be viewed on social media. Content posted on the Internet can be and should be considered public and permanent. As such, our officers and staff should use good judgment when using social media at work or home and protect the integrity of the agency and our profession. Generally speaking, our officers and staff are free to express personal opinions; however, if an employee has identified themself as a member of a specific agency, the employee must include a statement that they are speaking as an individual and not on behalf of their agency. At no time shall an employee engage in any activity that is inconsistent or incompatible with their duties. All employees should assume their speech and related activities on social media sites will reflect upon their agency, and at all times avoid comments that could be considered discrimination, harassment, workplace violence, and threats, either expressed or implied. Inappropriate postings must not be tolerated. 
Employees should also be mindful that using technology and social media may compromise their personal information and create security risks for them, their families, and others. Employees may not reveal confidential information, including information regarding any criminal case or law enforcement investigation on either closed or open cases on any social media site (e.g., Twitter). Employees should be taught to ensure the use of all information technology complies with all appropriate laws governing conduct as professionals. Postings, publications, or any communications made or generated from non-departmental equipment and/or systems are included in policies on confidential information; this applies to on-duty and off-duty use.
Labor Code Section 980(a) defines “social media” as an electronic service or account or electronic content, including, but not limited to, videos, still photographs, blogs, video blogs, podcasts, instant and text messages, email, online services or accounts, or Internet Web site profiles or locations. (b) An employer shall not require or request an employee or applicant for employment to do any of the following: (1) Disclose a username or password to access personal social media. (2) Access personal social media in the presence of the employer. (3) Divulge any personal social media, except as provided in subdivision. (c), which states nothing in this section shall affect an employer’s existing rights and obligations to request an employee to divulge personal social media reasonably believed to be relevant to an investigation of allegations of employee misconduct or employee violation of applicable laws and regulations, provided that the social media is used solely for purposes of that investigation or a related proceeding. 
References: 
Careless, J. (2005). Video mobile data terminals. Law & Order, 53(7), 16-18.  
Cowper, T. (2004). Improving the world view. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 73(1), 12-19.  
Crime Control Digest. (2005). Los Angeles uses technology to cut crime without adding new officers. Crime Control Digest, 39(5), 1-3.  
Forsythe, C. (2004). The future of simulation technology for law enforcement. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 73(1), 19-24.  
Hoover, L. (2004). Compstat as a strategy: A Texas perspective: Part I- conceptual framework. TELEMASP Bulletin, 11(4), 1-8.  
Jones, P. (2004). DNA profiling. Law & Order, 52(8), 92-96.  
Markey, J. (2003). New technology and old police work solve cold sex crimes. FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, 72(9), 1.  
Organized Crime Digest. (2005). New York provides ‘real time’ access for rapid analysis of violent incidents. Organized Crime Digest, 26(12), 1-3.  
Paisner, S. (2005). The Phraselator: Translation made quick and easy. Police Department Disciplinary Bulletin, 13(8), 1-3.  
Whitehead, C. (2005). NASA technology for policing. Law & Order, 53(10), 96-100.