Could digital iris cameras be an invasion of privacy?

On Tuesday, the Daviess County Sheriff’s Department demonstrated a new digital camera system that takes high-quality photographs of people’s irises.

According to Sean Mullin, president and CEO of BI2 Technologies (the company that makes the camera) the human iris is so unique that it can be used to identify missing children, lost senior citizens and people with criminal records.

“There would have to be 13 times more people on the planet” for people to have identical irises, Mullin said during the demonstration.

The company – and others like it – are creating national databases of irises for children and seniors. When people are incarcerated in county jails, the staff can use the device to add the person into the criminal iris database. In that instance, if a person is already in the database, the jail staff will have access to the person’s criminal history, aliases and a mug shot, among other things.

Mullin said people would sign up for the child and senior citizen databases voluntarily and said the child records would be deleted when the child reached age 18. But the technology has disturbing implications. 

In a sense, iris photographs are no different than fingerprints – expect that the photos take only a few seconds to take. Fingerprinting a subject takes law enforcement several minutes.

Further, an application  is being developed that would allow police and deputies to take iris photographs from iPhones.

That makes it easy for officers – once the iPhone application becomes available later this year – to take photos of everyone they interview.

 That may sound efficient, but it also creates the potential for abuse. Will every person stopped for, say, speeding have their irises added to the criminal database? What if you’re a witness to a crime, but the officer doesn’t quite believe your account of the incident? Will he photograph your iris just to make sure you don’t have a criminal history?

Giving officers the ability to take iris photos on the street would have the end result of collecting tons of information on people who otherwise would remain anonymous.

The potential for abuse is pretty great with such easily accessible technology. It’s up to law enforcement to show the tool can be used in a way that isn’t excessive.

What not to do after a traffic accident

A Philpot Kentucky man attempted to flee from a traffic accident early Sunday morning, but was soon apprehended after – loudly and conspicuously – drawing attention to himself.

Jason Aaron Harrington, 29, of Philpot, was driving on King Road in Philpot about 1:45 a.m. Sunday, when he collided head-on with another vehicle. J.D. Marksberry of the Daviess County Sheriff’s Department said the driver of the second vehicle told deputies Harrington was driving in the wrong lane and said he was unable to avoid Harrington’s vehicle.

After the accident, Harrington fled on foot. While sheriff’s deputies were responding to the accident, calls came in from the neighborhood about a man causing a disturbance.

Corey King, public information officer for the Kentucky State Police’s Henderson Post, said callers complained of an intoxicated man knocking on doors, trying to get inside residences and asking homeowners for a ride.

Harrington was arrested by a state trooper and charged with driving while intoxicated and leaving the scene of an accident without attempting to render assistance. The driver of the second vehicle received a mild cut, but declined medical treatment.