Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Senators To Apple: Pull iPhone DUI-Check Alerts

Posted by timothy on from the tell-us-senator-your-opinion-on-net-neutrality dept.

CWmike writes "Four US senators on Tuesday called on Apple to yank iPhone and iPad apps that help drunken drivers evade police, saying the programs are 'harmful to public safety.' The CEO of the company that makes one such app said the senators' demand was 'a knee-jerk reaction.'" Hugh Pickens points out that "Similar apps are available for the iPhone and RIM. Apple released a set of App Store guidelines in September that spells out what apps are and are not allowed to do. Included on that list of 'don'ts' are 'apps that encourage excessive consumption of alcohol or illegal substances, or encourage minors to consume alcohol or smoke cigarettes.'"

4 of 348 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Where in the Constitution? by crow_t_robot · · Score: 4, Informative

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop

    Cops use this as the guise to engage with you to for purposes of observing your reactions and identifying the smell of alcohol or other substances so they can then secure probably cause to make you perform a field sobriety test and/or breath test.

  2. Illegal in the UK? by Tx · · Score: 3, Informative

    In the UK, warning others of a police speed trap e.g. by flashing your lights is a criminal offence which will get you hauled into court and fined. So I wonder if these apps would even be legal in the UK (I don't have an iOS device, so I don't know if such things are on sale here).

    On the other hand, satnavs with speed camera warnings seem to be legal, but in that case you can argue that the aim is to help you keep your speed down in dangerous areas, i.e. to avoid committing the offence in the first place, whereas with dodging DUI checks, the offence has already been committed, you're just trying to avoid being caught.

    --
    Oh no... it's the future.
  3. Legalized checkpoints by swb · · Score: 5, Informative

    I'm told by a currently employed police officer that this is largely what motivates many suburban districts to perform speed traps. It has nothing to do with concern about speeding, but it enables them to stop and interview drivers essentially at random, fishing for other possible crimes.

    He also said that it was "widely believed" that vigorous traffic enforcement was a general deterrent to crime, the theory being that people involved in criminal behavior were sensitive to police presence and the risks associated with being stopped with incriminating items, flagged for parole violations/outstanding warrants, etc.

    To me it seems like a good excuse to run a police state.

    1. Re:Legalized checkpoints by crow_t_robot · · Score: 5, Informative

      You are exactly correct.

      It should be a requirement for every American citizen to read this book:
      http://www.amazon.com/Tactics-Criminal-Patrol-Discovery-Survival/dp/0935878122/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1300891075&sr=8-3
      The publisher won't sell this to civilians. You have to prove somehow that you are LEO-affiliated to obtain one but I received a copy from a friend who is currently a deputy sheriff and I read it cover-to-cover. IMPORTANT PART: THIS MANUAL DESCRIBES TO LAW ENFORCEMENT AN ARSENAL OF STOPPING, INTERVIEWING AND OBSERVATIONAL TACTICS TO GET YOU TO RELINQUISH YOUR RIGHTS AS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN TO ALLOW OFFICERS TO INSPECT YOUR PERSON AND VEHICLE. The techniques and methods described are AMAZINGLY effective and proven. It teaches them exactly how to let a suspect incriminate themselves and the exact legal boundaries for an officer to skirt while in your presence.

      If you have the chance, PLEASE read this book. It applies to you as a citizen regardless of whether you are a criminal or not.