executive branch and the legislative branch and the judicial branch since all other matters have been referred to the state. so if you just knew that it could tell you a great deal about what we should and should not do. >> host: marriage you seem to be pro-civil union. at that point was the difference? >> guest: what i am pro-and wide to find clearly, i say any two adults regardless of their sexual orientation should have the right to bind themselves in some type of a legal manner so they have property rights in visitation rights or whatever. >> host: too many people that's the distinction of difference. >> guest: i think marriage is a sacred institution and it's between a man and a woman and it has been for thousands of years. my problem is if we start changing it for one group why would you not change it for the

next group? where would you draw the line? would you say we are just going to change at this one time and we will never change it again? how is that going to go over? >> host: marijuana? >> guest: we have multiple studies that demonstrate that it has a very deleterious effect on the developing brain and that the brain develops right up until the late 20s therefore unless you don't believe the medical evidence why would we even be having the discussion? >> host: what is worse, alcohol or marijuana? >> guest: certainly if you use a great deal of alcohol that can be destructive also. >> host: arguably more harmful? >> guest: it has -- it could be. it has the potential to be but i'm not sure any of those things should be supplied. >> host: dr. ben carson i enjoyed it and i hope you get an

idea of -- and candy carson is your wife. >> guest: my wife for 39 years he keeps me on the straight and narrow. >> host: and the two books have been bestsellers. >> guest: thing about the number number one. >> host: thank you. >> guest: thank you for having me. our special booktv prom -- programming continues tomorrow night with programs from book fairs and festivals.

..

>> the soviet union in the soviet system contained the seeds of its own destruction. many of the problems that we saw at the end began at the beginning. i spoke already about the attempt to control all institutions in control of parts of the economy and political social life. the problem is that when you do that, when you try to control everything you create opposition and potential dissidents everywhere. if you tell all artists they have to paint the same way and one says, no, i don't want to, you have just made him into a political dissident. >> if you want to subsidize housing and we want to talk about it and the populace degrees, then put it on the ballot sheet and make it clear and make it evident in make

everybody aware of how much it is costing. but when you deliver it to these third party enterprises to know when you deliver the subsidy through a public company with private shareholders and executives who can extract a lot of that subsidy for themselves. >> christopher hichens, and applebaum, gretchen morgan said nephew of the 41 engaging stories now available at your favorite bookseller. >> our special. ♪ program and continues in a few moments. police state u.s.a. becoming our reality. some havana

>> host: it is a pleasure being here with you today, and i really enjoyed reading your book . spot. >> guest: i love thee and opportunity to talk with people about how to protect their data. we have so many modern day

privacy issues that are coming out. what i love about what you do with the book, so well researched and thoughtful and provoking. i am excited to talk with you today and have a conversation about what people need to know and is there actually anything that we can do about it? or of the things that i thought was interesting, and i rode a little bit in my book, how consumers did not realize they did not collect a lot of data back then. the cooperation will loom and an and in and near, what sort of compelled you to write the book or were there other driving forces. i have to inform people. >> first off thank you so much.

this is great, a pleasure to speak with you. i am glad to hear you enjoyed the book. there were other factors that drove me. i have been in reporting for a good 15 years. i started out on local level and covering the local level of government you get a hands-on experience on our policies and regulations impact average americans. i remember covering county government and asking people have purchased property with hopes of building their dream homes on them coming to the local printing office and request, you know, the right to build their homes on their properties. and the counties that i covered, it was almost like it was environmentalist ground zero battleground. it was so driven by environmental regulation and policy that they did not want to build anything. i recall vividly how this family came and with hopes to build a $500,000 a parcel

of property that they had purchased. and the local zoning people denied him repeatedly until the point that they had no appeals left. i remember then leaving, the woman in particular in tears because now what is she going to do with that property? you know, i was always keyed into issues like that. i am an american. you know, constitution is a big deal. you know, i read it just for fun sometimes. i was always kind of laser then on issues. covering the local government issues is what drove me. that and having four children. i worry about the fate of america and the future. >> you bring up the children , and you are absolutely right. the founding fathers fought so hard for him. some choices that we do not even know we're making. and what i love that you say

in the book is you have actually quoted the family father's. he read the ." it really does relate to the chapter. it shows that the principles of the founding fathers, the constitution, what this country was founded on even though the technology may change the principles to the same. >> you know, it is kind of like the bible and read the bible, the basic principles don't change. the constitution, it is not a living breathing document as al gore would intended. i've founding fathers give that was given us. the notion that our rights come from god, not government. if you think about that is a powerful principle and one that i fear is leading to the police state and that we have right now. and my biggest concern is

recapturing that because once he recaptured then you set our nation back on the path. >> in the book one of the things that was interesting as you talk about the places where you don't even know you're being attacked. so, for example, mike, author and i talked about this same. one of the things that people might not realize. you drive up to the shopping mall. surveillance going on, your license plate may be photographed. then you walk into the department store. your phone is talking to the wi-fi in the department store. now the store knows you are there. the next piece is the mannikins are actually watching you and trying to decide female and male. they may even try to decide ethnicity. also store in the database. but then he added that there is new technology.

and this is where i am sure people say, are you kidding me? you added that they will be eyeing listening features to these manikins. talk to us about some of the arrest and concerns and an odd moment for you when you saw that this is going on at the local department stores in europe and america. >> well, that moment really is where it crosses the line from stores posting notices in cameras being displayed in prominent places so that shoppers are where they're being recorded to the point where you have no idea as a shopper that your movement and conversation is being recorded and for what reason you don't know. so some of the technology that they have in place now decided reason is because.

they can gauge the best sellers. the big problem with this, of course, is shoppers don't know. you walk in the store, it is not like they say this dummy is recording you. you don't know that. that is a little bit creepy. it is interesting, but when it is happening with you is a little bit alarming. >> it is. it is one of those things to my don't remember walking into a store and having them and meet disclosure statement saying he may not only be photographed for security reasons. i kind of want to know what you are looking at. on your personal private conversations. i think that was one thing.

companies thirst for data. this insatiable appetite they have for data. customer loyalty is supposed to be a good thing. save us money. the bottom line revenue. but, you know, at what price all technology is taxable. the best and the brightest. and that data in the wrong hands could be potentially dangerous. and then as you learn to when it comes to the private sector with the database law and verse but been touched they want to request access to that data. progressing in that way whether it is recorded conversations are photographs. >> that is the big fear. first and foremost in the private field when you are a shopper, they should at the

very least give u.s. heads up about what information is being collected. cameras that are hidden, new technology. every piece shopper, big spender. it alerts the store clerks. this big spender is here. let's warm on him or her and get him more to buy more. it is things like that that shoppers may appreciate convenience. but not knowing, you are not given a choice. in the other part of the equation, when stores are collecting data they're is a database somewhere that is being kept. it is not just did a floating around. if law enforcement or government surveillance and seldom said the justification will have to be aware that you have no control on the data being

handed over. >> exactly. i would like to think that we are innocent until proven guilty provable let's stay on that topic official recognition. you mentioned you talk a little bit about how law enforcement is using facial recognition, a lot of states, not just a few, but a lot of states is doing the license renewal. um in some cases there asking you not to smile. your photograph as a dual purpose. >> of the state is being fed into state data centers. oftentimes people know them better as fusion centers. a lot of it is being collected for counter-terrorism reasons. because counter-terrorism

intel is not generating what people expected them to, it is also being used for law enforcement and to fight crime. when you are at your dmv and not smiling into the camera and, you need to be aware that this is another form of data collection. he should be concerned or a least curious where it will end up. >> so you also need to think about. the need to get your license. you could go the your state, governors say you don't like the practice. the pictures that are put up on the internet and social medium sauce and heat consumers need to realize you have to go through the state process.

what you choose to pose, going with the photos. the company, that can be just as important as well. oftentimes you can control. let's go to the bank. we talked a little bit about how there are some technologies now were as consumers we don't. the photograph is going on. i remember i could not believe that we could not call on our own customers. which of our customers acted for marketing. from our system somebody else. for mycenaean not allowed to market to our own customers.

we have to provide the disclosure statement. the banks have always sem the scare. if i collect data i have to disclose to you what i'm going to do with the. nafta protected area now that. but what is interesting is i think a lot of people don't realize how much the banks were told to process your data. it is not necessarily in a disclosure statement. if you make a deposit over $10,000 because of anti money-laundering the hell innocent and how great a customer you are then must report the transaction. they also have to report when you are signing up for credit. they asked a lot more questions than i normally would ask because they truly know you because they have to actually prove to different bureaus within the government that they truly did the customer due

diligence. talk a little bit about how some of your findings. some of the things the banks are being told they have to collect about you and the naturally turn around and handed over to other departments and agencies. >> well, he rightly described exactly what is going on with the banks. there kind of being put in a crunch in. the federal government is bearing down on banks lou. counter-terrorism reasons and so forth you must collect information on the customer's. but on the other hand the federal government is not really giving banks a checklist of questions to ask. and if banks don't ask the proper questions and something in sabine illegal the banks could actually be fined for that. there kind of in a tight spot right now as a customer guy and the bank of remember back of my first order back in. banks used to dry un monitor

you what rick, where you do business in. a business that he workout does business and overseas locations it may pry into that. they're trying to do their do built -- due diligence. what is happening in is the average american is peeling like they are suspected of a crime. >> you're right. what they may have to ask you i'm just trying to deposit my money. this is kind of the third degree children.

your mom, my mom. you talk about this in the book. i talked about it in my book parents really need to understand when you put your children the care of others what may be going on in the name of security are in the name of tracking for your kids. and so as it relates to the school looking at things like we will record the. well, we just saw your man, someone paid him to change their grade. and he got busted. we can see the dangers with that. well, gosh, that is really just high-school hijinks. you know, you should not have done that. was wrong. he will pay the price. no harm no foul men there is the other piece cannot the

data being collected. the scanning solutions. in some regards it is touted as a great way to make sure your child gets on the ride bust and for us to notify you that your kid got off the bus. what happened to a teacher or volunteer standing their saying good morning. good morning. just because technology can do it doesn't mean he shared as a mom but also as a reporter. some of the things he saw it. >> the issue he referred to

and florida. this is just 2013, believed. airbus that implemented a program. peres did not know about it. when the child would board the bus there were told to stare into the irish scanning the scene until the light turned blue he. he is and to add information on the parent's side. serbs parents ended up being outraged. the person who is supposed to send notification home to let them know that your child is going to be irish scamp, that person was sick that day. >> scanned on the boss. these are little kids. in no, it was like first, second, third grade.

>> right. so they don't know if it is a found out about it. stop join a program. what shocked me was the fact that this could go on. technology that is necessary and technology where parents don't need to get and "and be given the opportunity to say yea or nay to it before it is implemented. and also what shocked me was finding out the stuff like this is going on with regularity. there are not as many few and far between cases as they are emerging technology the argument is this is seen in the name of security your convenience. that was also something mentioned.

school lunches or getting kids on the right bus. i survived getting on off. i don't know about you. without scanning my iras were turning over my dna. and i see the danger of people saying it is about security. they went out on some of these others. and maybe think, that's great. bicycle, thinking about technology. this company who i don't know, my child's eyes can, as somebody steals my child's eyes can make can't kid in the nine. now they can go masquerading as my child whether it is health care, trying to get into buildings.

the code and the technology to literally seek out and virus scanner. and i think that is also part of the danger. the privacy aspect on the front end. when need to have disclosure on the back and. >> it is worse than someone stealing a credit card information. >> so you can always make and worst case argument to justify, you know, about any action on the part of the government. with technology and biometrics, often times it

is that worst case scenario that is being cited as justification for everyone having to participate. as a parent, in your local school could be looking at this technology. i want you to respect authority unless they ask you to give up your biometric data that old thing with this closes. you think about kids and talking to them about the different aspects of life and the birds and bees, now they might actually be talking about drones, the hummingbird model. there is also the be model. the fact and obama of times when people hear the word

drone the think those are official military deals, law enforcement protection use devices. we don't realize that they are in the chilly small and blending into nature has a b or a board at this rate. some of the challenges. anybody can have a drone. you're right about an elected official the chin and looked out her window and came face-to-face with the drone. talk about her experiences. >> it is funny. it is just like drones and privacies. have the same concerns. this particular instance. she was in her home. she looked up the window. a drawn-out solder when no peer in she took that experience to congress,

congressional colleagues to go slow on drone technology. i think the horse is basically a out of the barn. at this point there is now a lot of people can do to slow it. congress has tapped the sec to, but policies were commercials use of drums by 2015. amazon as already indicated that it must use drums tonight product delivery. think there is a pizza chain and was thinking of using drone is to deliver pizzas. what is going to happen is people will look at out conundrums coming in, delivering amazon products. it is kind of a cool thing. it will use that. going to be -- in no, kind of a cool idea. but then when law enforcement steps and to conduct surveillance operations, i think that's where people will be a little bit more alarmed.

>> we have cases where we have actually are rest citizens using drones. and i mentioned some of the drone challenges. the boat the cottage industry that is cropping up , anti drone heavies and anti turn losses. when then drove his target in on you to my visit probably going to do it? and talk a little bit about the complex that we of fat. and gentlemen who basically could have a board now has

apparent my heart goes out. that's correct and reasonable use of technology you talk about another case where he started eating. his family ended up at a standoff with the police. drones go involved. basically it will to arrest the family. talk a little bit about these two different scenarios. when you're rest of -- rescue and the life. going and are in turn to get involved. the slippery slope dangerous points here from a privacy perspective. cards are slippery slope. that is a good way to freeze its. on one hand using drones for overseas conflicts, you

know, that brings with it a host of questions about the ethics of origin war. the drones on american soil is something that when you use them for criminal reasons as you point out, you know, a board kidnapped and held underground, people can relax and understand. there was also drones used throughout a please shooter. and you know, the feasibility, some american citizens saw the justification for that. we used drones or environmental reasons as the epa indicated it might want to do to scour the field to make sure the people farm lands and crops and so forth are not violating environmental laws. that might be more people would like to draw the line.

they syndromes into the sky and color data. officers my house. they want to search for my house and over my yard. they can get a drama of a warrant. >> police don't have the right to use bronze horse ran as technology. if they want to use a drove to conduct a surveillance operation accused the border patrol's. conduct a surveillance operation. in the years to come as drums become more commonplace and americans become more accepting, if there it will to use terms of the slippery slope questions to ask is when that is flying above properties may be looking

for a certain suspect recording data all the same is sweeping up all types of data that is not pertinent. you could be standing nearby walking down the street. her images are being captured on video. and that is certainly something that most americans may not think go. but on the other hand you now you have to think where is my duty going? law and for some are laughing at. >> sebring have something interesting. kid on the case. taking pictures. it picked up all of a home wi-fi networks. wait a minute. as my right. he shouldn't be doing you have crossed the line. we said that to a private-sector company.

i would think and we would say this and then to law enforcement or even to have seen or and they said that some counties used on technology to see it people and put pools and without asking for permanence. so to your point, where do we draw not long? and that brings up an interesting point. a lot of times are written account of presidential election, looking at an elected official from washington or at home, often times we talk about the national or local economy, national security, local issues of the low collection the thing to a third turn on on the list might need to be around how you're going to protect the citizens are to privacy in the digital age? >> i definitely did that that should be a question.

they should be prepared to answer. even my book came out, lot more instances when that had they occurred i would have included the. the advent of data and energy technology is something the others are to put the puck a bottle. you need to plan ahead. the need to have in place policies and regulations during house of this technology should be used. police departments should not have to arms in their closet that they can take out whenever they want whenever there's a crime being committed policies and guidelines. what happens to that data after work?

they should be oversight. if it is going to be destroyed there should be along start to make sure that it is destroyed. have in their mind how they treat data going forward. >> it is interesting. it you think about facebook, twitter, mr. gramm, all of the fencer human hire talking about, most of those technologies are in the last ten years. over 12 years ago. and so set everything we just talked about, they were not really in the consumer eyeing and in the public eye really being used on a massive scale. what to you think is the implication?

are obviously it takes us a long time and again should be careful when we create. but you almost wonder, will it be an outdated? and so how do we think a pause in this new digital age. dynamic and fluid and given us an of karen's of people don't step out of bounds and we have the right balance on individual rights and privacy. >> that is going to be a hard. when you talk about the collection, surveillance type technologies, right off it raises the red flag. those two things really had done the same path. and should put their focus in developing some regulations and principles

using law enforcement. they can ride a vehicle down the street and peer into other vehicles and peer beneath people's clothing. all that can be done without a warrant. police have at their disposal technology that is emerging that helps them pretty calm before they occur and and all it predicted to the police to get a red flag or anthem but some of the police can actually respond to those areas of suspected crimes. that is straight out of george orwell. when people think of it in the need to think first and foremost what is the data being used war? can i be given a heads of. and if so, then people need to be in control of how that is allowed to be used,

specifically and most alarmingly. >> you definitely hit on some really great areas. law enforcement. they have one thing. i need you to work this. elected officials sometimes sang this can never happen again. something as horrible as the boston marathon,. how did you miss the clues? on a rule that anything like this happen again. you see this of violence is completely different. i think we all agree that we don't like to tragedies like the up. you mentioned in the book sometimes in his those tragic events. in that moment people want action. sometimes they don't realize and maybe actually trading off a little bit of their

privacy. talk about what you discovered. >> sort of following the tragedy. in now, to one along force was justified. root of the two terrorists. the action. but what i wanted to make clear is that if enough fear is generated among people and it opens the doors to what you just said, all types of civil rights infractions separate the boston marathon bombing what you saw was a complete -- city completely locked down, law enforcement going into people's homes without warrants pulling people out of gunpoint. there were different stories

told in the weeks and months to follow. people's civil rights and privacies were completely trapped and it was all in the name of security. in a, you can make up your own mind, there are not of was justified, but you have to realize that it from of fears generated of these types of things can happen. i remember specifically one story about an elderly woman who was in her home in the phone rang and she answered it and she was told by the force and the other hand to answer the door. when she opened the door she looked out and there were scores of armed police officers holding weapons out her on her doorstep and across the sea. what happened, somebody had called and said that the terror suspects were in her home. and so the police responded. they grabbed her and put her in detention, ultimately in a psychiatric unit for behavioral profile in.

finally got out. there was no crime or anything. it is just something that people need to be aware. when fear is generated oftentimes are security is the first thing that you reach for anderson writes you could care less about works and in that particular case there was cards or some going on. big data could be helpful. looking of surveillance. also looking at misinformation. the reason why you have the media, the media will be a trusted source. may not move with the police, but they typically do not released it. there was a young man who is wrongly accused. in no wycherley it took him a long time to recover from

being long the accused. in me have that on to. of something important on the hard drive. you can't personally unit back. big data used the wrong way drawing the wrong conclusions can be dangerous there's obviously the privacy issue. and then a young man who is on justly accused is pretty scary. >> and it is something americans need to be aware of. these things can happen. when it happens to somebody else's easy to dismiss. happens in the neighborhood and is closer to home. all laws of new guinea and of fighting for your prophecies and civil rights

malign about the right to be forgotten and basically the focus. were you surprised to see the you really come down on that right to be forgotten? do you think there will fall of course? >> i was not surprised. i don't think america will follow suit. i don't think that we are going to have any policies put in place. gary security information. in a politically correct, to basically called the american public, where not, to look it informational, warned or do another in as a

threepeat where we are sifting through innocent americans confirmation. >> okay. your prediction is don't hold your breath. >> exactly. >> when it comes to looking at peak data and the data collection you do mention, the effect of while you were looking for the bad guy a lot of by standards naturally get pulled in with that. whether it is pictures of a location, sir ron's video, drawn footers if to all of that going into a database naismith amelya done nothing wrong. what are some of your

concerns after doing this research and looking ahead? the fact of all of us minding our own business, our information, while blacks on facebook, search is on cool, all of that data having the opportunity to be aggregated and used to know what are some of your privacy concerns? >> the biggest thing is a turns average americans into immediate suspects. our society is not based on that. of the principle of innocent until proven guilty. it is a creepy feeling if you are not doing anything wrong. the same time the government is regarding as a possible suspect. my real problem is that on one hand we are collecting all kinds of data across all levels of government and business, private sector,

government sector. but at the same time we are not really doing anything common-sense to protect the security of america and to do those counter-terrorism type of initiatives that would be so simple. for instance, at the same time we are collecting data on innocent americans bear letting our borders remain powers. the ideal place to be would be coming of from our southern border. it is boris right now. i think that is something out, but crackdown on who. a lot of the common-sense measures are being overlooked. the same time of the ones that seem to put an innocent americans into targets are being bounced upon. >> you know, if you had the a maternity to build a privacy law and there are

three simple things. maybe three or four simple things in the privacy of what would your recommendation be? >> my recommendation would be first and foremost it is a counter-terrorism measure it has to state clearly what the goal of that counter-terrorism measure is way too many times it is being collected in the name of counter-terrorism and being is accused for a criminal aspects. second off, giving americans the right to know should come first and foremost. if an all possible, if it is not something that is going to put the security of our nation and risk that americans need to be aware of it, specifically something easy. you know, some of these data collections are easy to add

give primacy notification, but they are not being done. irises can think of any type of data collection and schools should not only be notified but should also be given a voice in the decisionmaking process. those are just a couple of things. >> that's great. i love the idea of you are under 18 you are asking that my permission to a minister aspirin when my child has a headache. you would need my permission to take their brains can. in my opinion i am not sure an official source that i trust. no. thank you airing much. up, when it comes to their research and you were doing, what is one of the cases that you came across that you thought, this absolutely cannot be true. this cannot be happening.

he just kept digging and digging. this really is happening. this case is happening. what was the craziest case that you uncovered? >> a lot of stories that could fit into that. the one that jumps into my mind, the utmost to lead is among government when it comes to doing things in the name of security in a feeling the need to let people know. a city council decision in scottsdale, ariz. what it was, they wanted to build a new building for a law enforcement. what they did was they did not have a public hearing. they voted to spend millions of dollars to construct this building. nothing was committed not want to tell citizens where it would be billed. when i called and asked them because i saw stories about it, the justification was,

this is a law enforcement building. we don't want to give a heads up to where our undercover officers may walk in and out of. but it was ridiculous. the square footage of the building dictated exactly where the building was going to be. on the flip side of that if you live up in washington d.c., it is not like the idea intel buildings. people come and go all the time. i just thought that was an egregious example of foul of local government could spend taxpayer dollars on a building fighting security reasons and not even bother to tell the taxpayers were the building that they are paying for is going to be built. >> were there repercussions? >> no. it was basically okay. >> they died down. maybe in the next election

in a sea changes. >> i agree. not quite sure were they would put this building. but that was quite an interesting case. one of the things that you do talk about, you mentioned we are on this dangerous course, slowly but surely justify for this or that reason. but uses a it is correctable have you seen any situations where for example i no there was a department store here in the u.s. when they found out they have these creepy manikins that probably would have really creep out. the electric complained to the department store corporate headquarters and removed those manikins. there is an example where you can change the course if

you let your voice be heard. in reversing this course, what are some other things that you have seen work well ? and continued the wake-up call. for us to have the opportunity. >> there have been protests around the nation and local people learn that the police department's was seeking at drones to purchase and use for criminal reasons. those are successful. people want to put a stop to data collection, the militarization of police, the need to keep it at your local community level. capital help politicians are not listening. letters and phone calls are

getting dismissed. your local county government and city councils control the purse strings. petition local politicians and not pay. you can use that. at the local level envoys will be heard. since. >> what advice would you have for corporations? we talked early on to my the revelations. all the data source.

they did not create microsoft. they were basically partner with the private sector. we know that the private sector is to make money. they produce products. the same time we want them to no less. but we want our privacy protected. fossils protecting your privacy. what would your advice be to accompany as far as their transparency to consumers and how they treat customer data, especially going back to the principle of if you collected and all technologies active volume of it bad guys wanted to. an aide to talk about how it might be used by other companies or government organizations. what would your advice be to

companies based upon your research on the next step that they need to take to regain customer confidence, trust, and start rebuilding and transparency conversation around privacy. >> slogans are good, but i think most americans would prefer full disclosure and honesty. when you saw around christmas time target shoppers out there credit-card and debit card information being swept up and stolons, it was slow going to get the information on exactly how many had been hacked the reader believe the corporation was alerted to the hackings a couple of weeks before they let it out into the regular public. when you find things like that you lose trust in the store. it seems to me the one that would give the most disclosure to my those would be the stores that people