Google Won't Pull Checkpoint Evasion App

RedEaredSlider writes "Don't expect Google to remove apps that help users avoid DUI checkpoints — the company says it is leaving the controversial apps on its Android Marketplace. A source said the company only removes apps that violate its Android content policies and the apps in question do not appear to violate these policies." We'll see if Apple caves to pressure to remove them.

Comments

Unexpected benefits

[XxtraLarGe]

I wonder if they ever consider that this may actually be persuading people to not drink & drive. They check their phone, see that there are some drunk driver stake-outs, and they take a cab home instead. I'm sure it doesn't happen in all cases, but if it helps in a few, that's a good thing.

Re:Unexpected benefits

[cayenne8]

These days...pretty much ALL traffic enforcement is more towards revenue generation than safety. I'd not be surprised if they start treating DWI like the stoplight/speed cameras..where they actually print on the ticket "this is not a moving violation and will not go on your record"...??

Seriously, I say lets take all the fines for traffic violations, and rather than give them to the police or govt....let's pool it and redistribute it BACK to the citizens at EOY that haven't committed any infractions, as a type of reward.

I'd love to see how much enthusiasm and vigor law enforcement would continue to be for these type of stake outs, speed traps and checkpoints then when they didn't get any money out of it.

Frankly, I'd rather give bounties and rewards for preventing hard crimes like murder....I'm much more worried about that than some traffic infractions.

Don't get me wrong, if you're driving poorly and too inebriated to operate a vehicle safely, get them off the road, but other than that...go out and hunt REAL criminals.

Re:Unexpected benefits

[gearsmithy]

Let me get that for you. http://www.cato.org/pub_display.php?pub_id=5167

Re:Unexpected benefits

[I(rispee_I(reme]

This article lends credence to the idea. Don't have a ready citation for the idea that drunk driving is something government needs, though.

If you're too lazy to click, Dallas, TX decided that the cameras at red lights were doing too good a job of reducing infractions and were cutting into their funding, so they got rid of them. The cops would have you believe that the purpose of the cameras was to increase safety, but their behavior clearly shows that the primary motive was cash.

It could be argued that this is the result of "running government like a business".

The lesson: If everyone stopped breaking the law, cops might have to do an honest day's work. :D

I expect no less

[Omnifarious]

Apple is practically obligated to pull the app, given the fact they're willing to act as the morality police for their users, though it might take them awhile because they like to pretend they 'think different'. RIM is a lily-livered chicken with no willingness to take any kind of stand for fear of offending anybody. It's also not a surprise they pulled the app. And Google is standing by their principles, and won't pull the app unless its actually illegal.

The world is acting according to my expectations in this regard. And once again, its Google I have the most respect for.

Re:I expect no less

[Anonymous Coward]

I would support the right of a KKK or Nazi sympathist to say or publish whatever he likes before I support you in oppressing him. You are no better than the religious lunatics who indoctrinate their offspring. Enjoy your 'freedom,' serf.

Why should they?

[hawguy]

Why should they? Police in most (all?) areas are required to publish the locations of checkpoints ahead of time, so these apps are just making public information easier to find.

Re:Why should they?

[GodfatherofSoul]

It's considered entrapment if they don't. If you read your local paper, you'll see checkpoints published. Of course, law enforcement is constantly trying to push the limits. After our local PDs started ramping up DUI checkpoints, they started restricting information on locations, shortening the lead time for announcements, etc.

Checkpoints

[ryanov]

I find checkpoints annoying, and I don't drink and drive. Seems to me if I want to know how to avoid them, I should be able.

Expected benefits

[RingDev]

Yes, and while standing shoulder to shoulder with drunk drivers and Google, we are also standing shoulder to shoulder with our local news papers, radio stations, municipalities, and police departments, seeing as how they are REQUIRED BY LAW to advertise the location of these check points.

It is unconstitutional to search or sieze an individual or their car with out reasonable cause. Being on the road after bar time is not reasonable cause. The only way that these check points have been able to pass constitutional muster is by advertising their existance (including the when and where) to act as a deterrant.

I loathe drunk drivers. I lost a girl friend and another close friend to drunk drivers. I left a company after the finding out that the CEO had been arrested for his 4th DUI. I'd love to see much harsher penalties for multiple offence drunk drivers. But the posting of these check points is a matter of constitutional law. If the senate were to forbid media industries from distributing this information, the check points would fail to pass the constitutional measure and would have to stop.

As much as I hate drunk drivers, I love the Constitution far more.

-Rick