Slashdot Mirror

You forgot Philando Castile and Tamir Rice. And Chad Chadwick. Yeah, I actually do care.

Many (most?) US cops are poorly trained cowards. That's why they keep shooting people who aren't real threats. That's why they pepper spray people indiscriminately. That's why they grenade babies. That's why SWATing is actually dangerous in the USA. And that's why suicide by cop is actually viable in the USA (even if you change your mind they may shoot you anyway: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... ).

If firefighters were as cowardly as US cops they'd refuse to go into any burning building to save lives and just spray at it from a safe distance.

In the USA if you were trying to save someone who was suicidal, calling the cops may result in that person getting killed ( https://www.washingtonpost.com... ). Better to call others like the fire brigade.

How many other places in the world do the cops destroy and empty building? http://www.policestateusa.com/...

I'm a coward too but I didn't apply to be a police officer. Those cops are not fit to be cops.

You're conflating two issues. The issue at hand is whether Apple can be compelled to produce speech against their will. This isn't a question of whether Apple's speech is protected; it's a question of whether the government can compel someone to speak against their will.

The issue you're talking about has nothing to do with the current case as it exists today, and is instead asking if Apple in the future should have the right to produce any speech at all. That's an issue for legislators or the courts in the future to decide when Apple actually produces code that matches your description. As of yet, they haven't, though by all indications, they're trying.

My answer to that second issue is that yes, their ability to create products with strong encryption should be protected. Were strong encryption solely of use to criminals, you may have a point, but as it stands, our right to be secure in our papers and persons is protected under the Fourth Amendment. It's a bit silly to suggest that a Constitutional right should be abridged "because it helps terrorists", especially so because by that same logic, we should do away with the firearms that are protected by the Second Amendment and the right to not self-incriminate protected by the Fifth Amendment, since rapists, pedophiles, terrorists, and all sorts of other bogeymen use those rights on a daily basis to avoid prosecution and conviction. Strong encryption is one of the few ways that an innocent person can be secure in the modern era, so a suggestion that we should do away with it because it helps terrorists is a non-starter in my book, since it'd mean doing away with the right of the innocent--us--to be secure.

So, yes, strong encryption may help terrorists, but so does free speech, so do guns, so does the right to not incriminate themselves, and the list goes on. This is yet another right we protect so that it's there for when the innocent need it.

Also, stop worrying about bogeymen. To put the numbers in perspective, based on the 2011 statistics for U.S. citizens around the world (including U.S. soldiers in war zones), you're:

- 2x more likely to die to a dog bite...
- 4x more likely to die from a lightning strike...
- 9x more likely to be killed by a police officer...
- 26x more likely to die by falling out of bed...
- 187x more likely to starve to death...
- About 2000x more likely to commit suicide...
- About 6000x more likely to die due to medical error...
- About 33,000x more likely to die from cancer...
- About 35,000x more likely to die from heart disease...

...than be killed by a terrorist.

But hey, if you think that allowing the police to have unfettered access to you and your personal information makes sense, despite the fact that we were just talking the other day about how over 100 identified and 200 unidentified officers had abused that access in a single case of harassment against one of their own , you'll have to pardon me for disagreeing with you.

http://www.policestateusa.com/...

In 2011 a Florida Highway Patrol officer pulled over and cuffed a miami police officer for going 120 mph to a second job.
The FHP officer was harassed by other cops.

"After filing a public records request with the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, Watts discovered that her personal information had been pulled up by scores of officers from 25 different jurisdictions. Her data had been accessed more than 200 times total."

Not to be too cynical, but I don't suspect the company behind this app is so much a "moral company" as it is a front for a law firm(s). Not sure if it works the same in the UK, but in the U.S. at least, that kind of data would be very valuable to lawyers wanting to sue the city/state for damages; and it would also be very valuable as a way to connect with potential clients.

That's great news. It means this practice is more likely to spread and receive some serious financial and legal backing. You can't reasonably expect corporations to be moral entities, at least not under the system we have now.

If there's money (and good PR) to be made protecting citizens from the abuses of police, and providing police a strong incentive to obey the law they've sworn to uphold, then said law firms will have earned it by providing a useful service. That's exactly the way the system is supposed to work. I hope it proves to be a profitable venture, lucrative enough to entice many different law firms to compete with each other and find better ways to do it.

A lot of police are growing out of control. They currently have little or no accountability and in too many cases of suspected wrongdoing, a paid vacation ("paid suspension") is the worst penalty an officer ever faces for serious charges like excessive (even lethal) force. These are charges that would land any regular citizen in handcuffs, in jail, and facing a jury. See this story for just one example, and note that the ranking cop accused of anally raping a man (with strong evidence) received a promotion. People are getting tired of this. A legal, effective solution is long overdue.

They do work. Just not in the way they say they do. In an interrogation if someone is nervous that their lies are going to be detected they will potentially show other visible signs in behavior or answering of questions, someone that goes out of their way to beat a polygraph in such an arena is also someone that needs some serious looking at, after all what are they so scared of that they are trying to ensure they don't raise alarm bells.

No. They don't work. At all. People are naturally nervous when being interrogated or otherwise threatened by "authority figures". Just ask the guy who was medially raped for hours on suspicion of carrying drugs in his colon, because he was "tense" and "clenched his buttocks", when he of course was innocent the entire time.

Going only on what shows up in the news, a SWAT raid can end in the deaths of innocents and/or significant injuries.

That no one has died yet as a result of swatting suggests that they're largely doing their jobs.

http://www.cato.org/raidmap
http://www.sott.net/article/266876-Swat-team-shoots-innocent-man-22-times-in-front-of-his-family-case-settled-in-the-millions
http://www.policestateusa.com/2013/misidentified-man-killed-when-swat-team-started-his-house-on-fire/
http://www.businessinsider.com/9-horrifying-botched-police-raids-2012-2?op=1
http://www.mintpressnews.com/video-swat-team-kills-innocent-man-drug-raid-found-just-2-marijuana/200738/
http://www.ctpost.com/local/article/A-costly-SWAT-raid-gone-wrong-4303215.php
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/10/swat-raid-casualties

Hey AC. :)

It's all good, I know things don't always come across quite right. I didn't consider it too trollish.

More than likely if it did come down to a large faction versus another large faction, and the authorities (law enforcement and/or military) were divided on the cause, they'd be handing out weapons and gear anyways, and still run out of ammo too fast.

Either side would probably have to "borrow" from gun stores anyways. I don't think even most local law enforcement has enough real firepower to handle war like battles.

Look at cases like this. 23 officers fired at least 377 rounds in less than a minute. Even the professionals don't control themselves in less than critical situations. If that was a combat situation and they reloaded, they'd all be out of ammo before the fight started, and realize they took out an empty vehicle or apartment. Well, hopefully empty.

I happen to be one of the people who does have weapons, including an AR-15. I have quite a few magazines, and I buy ammo by the case. I really don't like paying range prices for ammo, and I don't like wasting range time reloading magazines.

You stupid ignorant morons. You really have no fucking idea what is going on? This is what could happen to you next: http://www.policestateusa.com/...

A tip usually isn't enough for a search warrant. ...which would require an arrest warrant, with an even higher burden of proof, and a prosecutor that thinks they can make a case on more than just a few pictures of you not even taken in your house. That's not very Scottish, either.

Except cops and prosecutors do worse than that, with less evidence to start with, on a regular basis. With "tips" based on information the cops either made up or acquired illegally, and the judge signs off on the warrant using the "confidential informant" excuse.

No way they just Taser you for refusing to answer questions.

You can be tased or beaten by cops pretty much at their psychotic discretion.

Boy tased for refusing to wash cop car

Man tased for not giving up his phone

Man beaten to death for not providing ID

We live in a police state, and it's not going to stop until either 1) we raise standards and pay for cops, or 2) we liberalize CCW laws and recognize the right of self-defense against bad cops.

I would guess that if the victim dies while being harassed ("stop resisting! stop resisting!" and dies).

This is the monster we have created, and now have to live with. And it's starting to eat us. And you are not exempt from having one of these "mistakes" happen to you.

The war on drugs appears to be escalating, too http://www.policestateusa.com/2013/innocent-man-given-anal-cavity-search-colonoscopy-after-rolling-through-a-stop-sign/

Thank you Mr. Taco Cowboy (if that's your real name). The FBI should be visiting soon. Please hide your dogs, for their own sake.