Raw LLM Responses

My opinion on this matter: the technology of automatic tracking and surveillance is not a whim, because such a system is cheaper and more efficient than live police patrols. For China, this is especially important, because now it has a lot of very rapidly growing modern cities, with a population of tens of millions of inhabitants, which were quite recently rural. If in such a situation to rely on the ordinary police, then its staff should be so huge that no state can withstand it. Therefore, China is introducing an electronic surveillance system and thus has the ability to maintain law and order in such huge new cities. This is understandable, but the downside of such technologies is the great opportunities for the abuse of information received from such a system. And this is also shown clearly. What should democratic countries do in this situation? I think the best solution would be the following - the system is implemented and monitors, storing this data in such a way that law enforcement officials cannot access them until the system automatically qualifies by formal signs that there are signs of a clear violation (and after this case is sent to the processing of law enforcement officials). Or by court order. In other cases, the information is stored for a certain time without the possibility of personnel accessing it and then destroyed (erased). In this case, this system could be a perfectly acceptable element of the law enforcement system in developed Western countries.