SFPD say new technology is paying off, but does more surveillance equal less crime?

Yahoo

11-04-2025

The Brief
SFPD have released a video touting the benefits of recent, voter-approved technologies that they say are paying off.
The mayor and chief of police embrace technology as the "future of policing."
Privacy advocates have concerns about mass surveillance and question if it really means there is less crime.
SAN FRANCISCO - San Francisco police gave KTVU a behind-the-scenes peek at the new high-tech center officers are using to crack down on crime. Officers say it's already making a major difference, but privacy advocates have concerns.
What we know
According to the police, the Real-Time Investigation Center is up and running, using 21st century technology.
San Francisco police say drone footage is helping to track down criminals.
In one case, officers were able to track a vehicle across the Bay Bridge, and later take a suspect into custody.
The drone program, along with real-time cameras deployed throughout the city, are all managed through the city's real-time investigation center inside 850 Bryant Street.
"The license plate reader program, which is just over a year old, has been a game-changer. The drones are another game changer," said Police Chief Bill Scott.
San Francisco police say so far the combined technology has led to more than 500 arrests; among those, more than 160 stolen vehicle arrests and 80 robbery arrests.
The chief said while the department is still understaffed, the technology acts as a force multiplier, allowing officers to more quickly locate and arrest suspects, clear cases and get back on the streets.
"We know we need more officers to fill our ranks, but these tools will make us more effective," said Chief Scott. "I cannot emphasize that enough. The force-multiplying effect that RTIC has had on this police department and safety of the city has to be highlighted."
City leaders say leaning into the new technology has helped drive down crime in the city.
Police say property crime is down 35% from last year, and violent crime is down 15%.
Mayor Daniel Lurie said the city is committed to keeping up the momentum.
"This technology is the future of policing for SFPD officers, using their training and judgment, supported by the best tools available to keep our communities safe," said Mayor Lurie.
San Francisco police say embracing the new technology has helped, but it isn't a substitute for officers on the street.
The department is still trying to fill more than 500 vacant positions, and said adopting the new technology may help recruit more cadets to the police academy.
Tracy Rosenberg, executive director of Media Alliance, calls a video released by SFPD promoting their new technology as "Blade Runner-style." She reminds that the new technology, including drones, was permitted through Proposition E, which was passed by voters in 2024.
She says the video "ends with a cop trying to talk a person down from a suicide ledge in a tacit acknowledgment that drones and cameras have their limitations."
"The ad describes what is called a real-time crime center, which is a room where multiple surveillance feeds are coordinated. In this case, license plate reader cameras and drones," said Rosenberg. "We can all appreciate the crime rates in San Francisco hitting a 20-year low after a moderate rise during pandemic and post-pandemic conditions, but should be wary of the notion that more surveillance equals less crime and that peppering the city with flying cameras makes for an urban utopia."
She says in the days of increasing authoritarianism we should be careful about describing the future of policing as a mass spying machine.
"The risks we take by uncritically cheering on an expansive surveillance state can be greater than temporary relief from a wave of stolen cars and property thefts," said Rosenberg.
She notes that these technologies can, and in most authoritarian countries are, used to crush dissent, profile protesters and prevent citizen activism.
"Not necessarily something to celebrate in this political moment," said Rosenberg.
Joshua Richman, communications director with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, agrees constant surveillance is concerning.
"What it really comes down to is, do we want to live in a city where all of us – all of us, not just 'criminals,' but all of us - are watched and listened to everywhere we go?" said Richman.
He says the all-seeing panopticon is something we once associated with with prisons, but that now it's happening in communities.
"Use of these surveillance technologies can infringe on our constitutional rights, including to speak and associate freely under the First Amendment or be free from unlawful search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment," said Richman.
He continued, "Law enforcement also tends to deploy surveillance technologies disproportionately against marginalized communities. And these technologies are prone to abuse by rogue officers, and can be subject to error or vulnerability, causing damaging repercussions for those who interact with the criminal justice system."