Ladies and Gentlemen: If the "facial recognition" is a simple program such as that used in some digital cameras today, fine. Also, in certain "stand alone" (not internet connected) devices, such as screeners at airports, also acceptable. This might also let us do away with most of this unlawful and degrading "groping" that has caused so much bitterness and animosity. This would be the ONLY commercial use that I find acceptable. Use by somebody like Google or Facebook I find disturbing in the extreme. HOWEVER, to be used by police agencies, or the military, opens up so many possible abuses that would violate a plethora of privacy issues, including some Constitutional questions. If there were a way for ONLY a computer doing the "looking" and not the operator with the computer notifying said operator IF and WHEN it has a match, then MAYBE it can be used in public areas. As for "vulnerable" populations, anybody under "voting or legal age" should be exempt from this intrusion. If they are too young to sign a legally binding contract, they are too young for this invasion of privacy. "Prohibitted places"? Of course there are! Would you want some camera that can recognize faces in a "fitting room" at a clothing store? How about in a bathroom? If yes in those places, WHERE DOES IT STOP?? "Notice given"? ALWAYS, even in public areas. Look at all the signs out there now that state something about an area being "under video surveillance"? "Best practise"? That would be to DENY the use by private citizens or companies and restrict its use to those VERY limited areas mentioned above.