Slashdot Mirror
Boston Cops Outraged Over Plans to Watch Their Movements Using GPS
Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "The Boston Globe reports that the pending use of GPS tracking devices, slated to be installed in Boston police cruisers, has many officers worried that commanders will monitor their every move. Boston police administrators say the system gives dispatchers the ability to see where officers are, rather than wait for a radio response and supervisors insist the system will improve their response to emergencies. Using GPS, they say, accelerates their response to a call for a shooting or an armed robbery. 'We'll be moving forward as quickly as possible,' says former police commissioner Edward F. Davis. 'There are an enormous amount of benefits. . . . This is clearly an important enhancement and should lead to further reductions in crime.' But some officers said they worry that under such a system they will have to explain their every move and possibly compromise their ability to court street sources. 'No one likes it. Who wants to be followed all over the place?' said one officer who spoke anonymously because department rules forbid police from speaking to the media without authorization. 'If I take my cruiser and I meet [reluctant witnesses] to talk, eventually they can follow me and say why were you in a back dark street for 45 minutes? It's going to open up a can of worms that can't be closed.' Meanwhile civil libertarians are relishing the rank and file's own backlash. 'The irony of police objecting to GPS technology for privacy reasons is hard to miss in the aftermath of United States v. Jones,' says Woodrow Hartzog. 'But the officers' concerns about privacy illustrate just how revealing GPS technology can be. Departments are going to have to confront the chilling effect this surveillance might have on police behavior.'"
"has many officers worried that commanders will monitor their every move"
That's sorta the point of this operation.
We know it sucks if you're just in a doughnut-shop and a robbery happens next door.
This will just nudge you to take the robbery first, the doughnut second.
As for the 45 minute dark alley meetings with confidential informants, you can be seen there with the naked eye!
Give your CI a fucking burner-phone, we're in the 3. millennium.
pots and kettles etc.
"Oops, I always forget the purpose of competition is to divide people into winners and losers." - Hobbes
This is pretty ironic to say the least. They loved the idea that they could track anyone at any time but they don't like the idea of being tracked. I feel no sympathy.
Their commanders? If cops can't trust other cops, why should the public trust cops?
Poor powiceman. Don't worry. After all, if you're not doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide, right?
while performing their duty.
They're expected to fill out a duty log detailing everything which they did.
They're expected to accurately and promptly reply when the dispatcher asks where they are and what they're doing.
If their supervisor shows up on site and asks what's happening they are obligated to comply.
If an elected official whose duties include supervising those in their chain of command shows up, they are obligated to comply w/ reasonable requests for information.
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
So why were you driving a 100 miles an hour down the interstate when you weren't responding to a call? I see it pretty often around here...no siren, just one cop driving down the shoulder of the road passing traffic.....
If you have nothing to hide you shouldn't mind if you're being watched, now should you?
There's a reason this ended up on the ACLU's website.
If you read TFA, Boston uses automatic license plate readers (ALPRs). Since each readout is logged and timestamped, this log data correlated with location history for cruisers could be used to build a massive location history database with very good coverage.
Barring that, as a public servant, a police officer is not entitled to privacy while on the job. As they are granted powers most people are not, they must also expect to be held accountable for their actions.
When off the clock, an officer is entitled to privacy like every other citizen. Keep in mind, the GPSes are installed in the cruisers. They're not ankle bracelets for crying out loud. If they're on foot patrol (do cops still do that?) the red dot on the dispatcher's map will show their car's location. The question mostly remains, then, do Boston cops typically drive their cruisers home, or leave them at the station and drive their personal cars home?
Since the goal of this tracking is to make 911 dispatching more efficient, the simplest solution is just to not record historic location data - show it in real time, and that's it. This mitigates tthe data mining and privacy issues while still giving 911 the tools they need.
'If I take my cruiser and I meet [reluctant witnesses] to talk, eventually they can follow me and say why were you in a back dark street for 45 minutes? It's going to open up a can of worms that can't be closed.'
Then moron, you log and report it like any other part of a proper investigation, and your commanding officer will be fine. If however you were on that street using your authority to extort sex from a drug addict prostitute, I can see why you are concerned.
Personally, I think all law enforcement officers, with exception possibly of undercover operations should have constant GPS and video surveillance of them (perhaps wearing google glass). Unless it is sensitive information to a current investigation it should be public domain. Once an investigation is complete the same shoud apply.
Law enforcement types tend to be abusive bullies that think they are doing things for the good of others, much like the father/spouse that is beating you 'because I love you'. There is less and less accountability for law enforcement, we need to change that.
Silence is a state of mime.
Maybe if you're conducting the "interview" with the "reluctant" witness with your fists, then you're hesitant to tell the superior officers about it.
... the watcher is watched and finds out they don't like it? Well, well...
I'm in the midst of reading a book on Victorian England. It's interesting to learn a little about how policing came into being. No surprise to me that from the very beginning, policing had nothing to do with protecting and serving anyone but the monied classes. Policing has _always_ been about subduing the restless masses. [Hey! I'm a poet and don't know it!!!]
On top of that I would add something largely forgotten: they are acting the public's trust and in the name of the government that is (at least still in name) are acting on the behalf of the public. Every person that pays into that trust with taxes should have the right to know what is going on and hold officials accountable.
Police departments attract people that like to use authority over others and many officers forget they are operating in the public trust. There should no expectation of privacy at all, and I think the Federal courts constant cutting down of rules and laws meant to keep police actions private backs that idea up.
... & here I am playing the world smallest violin for these poor, put-upon police officers.
There is a war going on for your mind.
only the upper party members are allowed to turn the volume down on their telescreens.
--
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
As a Bostonian this makes me happy. Maybe the cops sleeping in their cars will now have to work for a living. Having worked downtown for years I know exactly where and when to go to find a cop hiding and asleep in his car.
Well... It is Boston. I'm sure this was well covered long before gps was invented.
Dear Public Servants: If you're not doing anything wrong, then there shouldn't be a problem.
"I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
All the field technicians have company supplied phones that have GPS tracking enabled. Their supervisor can track them via a map display and their movements are logged and retained. They also are dispatched via those phones and enter their time and material accounting per job that way. It's very efficient. Do they like it? No, not very much, but it's part of the deal if you work as a field technician for this company with over 30,000 employees world-wide. If you don't like it, don't work in this well-paid industry. All of the competitors are doing the same thing.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
I work in Law Enforcement in Canada (not a cop) but I can tell you that up here, in my area anyways; we have GPS not only in the cars, but on each officers individual RADIO. Hell even the meter maids have GPS in their radio. Its an officer safety question, when you make an Officer needs assistance call dispatch immediately knows exactly where you are, and everyone else can respond accordingly. I've never heard any officer complain about it.
It has other uses too, for example the bylaw/parking officer can simply call for a tow truck "To my location" and then leave and get on with their day.
I imagine that an undercover cop isn't doing his job particularly well if he's driving a police cruiser.
Of Boston's NPR this morning having a series on prostitution in Boston, and talking about the frequency that Boston cops are seen ... well, lets just say not arresting the girls ...
No wonder they don't want GPS in the cars ...
Plain and simple.
Between cops who think they can confiscate your camera and delete the images, cops who file an incident report only to have amateur video show what really happened, the fact that they want to have warrantless wiretapping and GPS tracking, and generally a lot of bad behavior -- these days citizens have very little reason to trust cops.
Either the perception is they're outright lying to us, or that they're crooked and on the take, or just generally willing to abuse their authority.
I'm sure there are many good an honest cops. But there's also a fair few which seem anything but.
How often has there been an officer involved shooting, which eventually turns out to be a complete misuse of force which we never would have known about without something catching it on video to tell us what really happened?
I'm of the opinion cops should be absolutely tracked on GPS, and should also be wearing cameras to record their interactions with the public. And in a world where the government wants to spy on everything we do, I have no sympathy for police who want to be able to be off the record and leave it entirely to the story they tell us to define the truth.
Often these days one is left with the impression that there's enough cops who are just thugs with badges that you more or less have to assume we're better off by closely watching what they do instead of just taking them at face value.
Because there's been at least half a dozen news stories in the last few years where the police have been shown to be lying, and just circling the wagons to come up with the official story when they do something wrong.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
I passed an unmarked a few hours ago, looked at the cops inside and just shook my head and thought "Somehow, the criminals don't scare me like these guys do."
So many cops have such a "Bad Boy" look these days. They carry themselves as if they're mean and tough. And frankly, I couldn't imagine asking one for help. Last year, I was in North Carolina and was lost and my phone battery was dead. I walked up to an officer and politely asked him if he could point me towards the local train station. He abruptly pointed and walked away. I eventually asked someone who looked like a criminal as I was out of options and he gave me good directions and a light for my cigarette.
I think cops who are used to a little too much freedom might need this.
Naw, it's just typical union mentality that gets in the way of something like quicker response time. This means that resources get used more efficiently, reducing crime and not having to incur additional costs such as more police. That's contrary to labor practice which is let's hire more people. Or they could just be trying to find the best doughnut/coffee shops in town. Does this mean when the police get caught up in all the "police state" surveillance there may actually be some thoughts of saying we've gone to far? Naw, the Administration and the Defense contractors have too much vested interest in selling all those drones and cameras and license plate trackers. So, cops of Boston, consider this a jobs program but not for you but for all those oinks in DC living off of our Tax Dollars.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
Exactly. Every supervisor I've had for the past decade has known that I read Slashdot on the job. They also know that I deliver good results on time, and work extra without hesitation if needed. It should always be the results that matter.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
because I caught myself thinking this is a good idea. It sounds fine. But any other type of surveillance of any other group of people I would vehemently oppose. Why is it that this doesn't bother me, and is this what it feels like to be a supporter of the NSA?
The cops aren't the ones repeating that ancient fable.
Wrong. Many cops do. In fact, most people do.
False, on several points. Every time one of those "masterminds" pushes some abusive big-brother shit, police unions invariably support it, to make them "more effective."
Plus, it was well-established years ago that "just following orders" (being "pawns") doesn't excuse evil and corrupt behavior.
It is perfectly reasonable to hold both the corrupt leadership, and those who spread their corruption through the populate, in the same anger and contempt.
We had just started putting GPS on our delivery trucks about a year before I left my last job. The guys who did their route and got back to base in the expected amount of time were never checked unless a customer requested an ETA. However, we had a few guys who always seemed to take a lot longer, so we checked their GPS routes much more often and found stuff like two hour lunches, or going thirty miles out of their way to stop at home... stuff that really impacted our delivery schedules and the workload on their coworkers, not to mention limiting the total number of deliveries (which is to say, income) we could make from a single truck and driver.
tl;dr: Guys who delivered results were rarely monitored at all, and if they were, issues were usually ignored. Guys that didn't deliver good results could no longer give bullshit excuses and were dealt with appropriately.
I'd only argue that I would replace "pays taxes" with "citizenship". Lots of foreign visitors pay taxes of one sort or another, but its citizens who the cops are primarily in charge of protecting. Likewise, not all citizens can, do or are able to pay taxes but should still be able to hold the police accountable (eg. underage people, low income people, etc).
OK, guys, no cruisers within 20 minutes from here - let's hit them.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
You maybe mean citizen or something else. Police are not part of the military (yet) and so not able to refer to everyone else as civilians. Don't add to the confusion.
Normally chilling effects are bad, but, I have long felt police behaviour could use a serious chilling effect, maybe even a freezing one.
However, that was always just my feeling, now that there is some data: http://thelibertarianrepublic.com/body-cameras-revolutionizing-police-accountability-video/
When police know actions are being recorded, a 60% drop in use of force. Amazing how people's actions change when there is a credible witness.
"I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
Those who are employed as public servants, be they police or fire or even plain old government workers, should expect to be held to a higher standard. You are working for the public, not some company or even some NPO. You work for everyone. With that comes an additional level of responsibility, and thus additional scrutiny.
I find it disturbing when a police cruiser is being driven recklessly, particularly when the lights aren't flashing. I similarly find it amusing that police don't want to be monitored - given recent stories about officers caught spending their patrol time sleeping. (Do a Google search. Its rampant enough that you'll find plenty of hits) If the GPS says the cruiser hasn't moved for the past 60 minutes, we probably know what's going on.
As to the remarks herein about attitudes of officers towards the citizenry, I concur. Every interaction I've had with uniformed officers has been identical. I'm the idiot for asking directions. I'm the one at fault for whatever is their current interest. I'm the criminal. I'm the one that needs to be 'dealt with'. Whatever happened to "Serve and Protect"?
Finally, we have far too many police. If the only thing your officers have to do is to sit along side the roads and point a radar gun, then you have too many police. Police unions will never back down from forcing city and county governments to hire ever more patrolmen. It is counter to their interests. However the number of patrolmen on staff should be dictated by the crime rate and the response requirements of the community - not its population.
The poor dears... Coppers can never catch a break, can they? Like when they accidentally empty their magazines into some scary/scared-looking family and their trained attack-poodle because they smashed down the wrong... like, 'cause the family was living at the wrong address, even though it was obviously an accident, they still get swapped on deir poow widdle wists... even though they got a suspicious-looking animal off the streets. It ain't right, god damn it.
*sniff*
Now my Boston cream doughnut's turned into a Boston stream doughnut, 'ca... well, 'cause it's all soggy with tears! :o(
*weeps to bagpipe music*
I know... I'll go shatter some poor asshole's life, that always cheers me up! :S
Thank you, Edward Snowden.
"Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
I have no problem with cops being tracked while on the job. I actually think it's an excellent idea. What I am worried about is the slippery slope. We've seen it with drug testing: at first, it was only the people who REALLY needed to have their shit together, like air traffic controllers. Then it was train conductors. And school bus drivers. And truck drivers. Now, it's just indiscriminate: janitors, secretaries, nurses, accountants... (although strangely enough, the managers who oversee these workers usually don't have to piss in a cup.)
Ah, but then... here is the very important part: it's open for abuse. The system you mention is a very good system as long as the one doing the checking is wise enough to not push it too far. But it can be very easy to think people should be doing more (the stereotypical boss who wants more productivity and doesn't care about how it works in practice, or looks at the wrong productivity signals [tickets solved vs difficulty/importance of tickets solved]), and/or sanction things that you normally wouldn't even if you knew them.
EVERY system is open to abuse, that's human nature. ... abuse happens. Was this fair to their coworkers-? No.
Those delivery workers who were goofing off were in fact guilty of abusing the current system., so
This rule postulates GPSes be installed in the police cruisers, not the cop's personal vehicles.. they're on the clock, so it'd be a little hard to see how this would be abused. It's accountability.
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
Mod parent up. Theaetetus has the right idea. When a cop is performing his or her duty, they are enacting the will of their superiors (-all- the way up the chain)...not their own. They must be held to account when they step outside the law.
In Providence, RI about a decade ago. To my knowledge, all the cruisers have GPS in them today.
But it sort of reminds me back about five years ago. I was working in a state government office and part of my duties were to occasionally glance through the proxy logs. One day I note some sort of egregious behavior on the part of our Chief of Staff and so I bring it to the unit Director where I'm told "We do nothing about it." I tarried with "So does this apply to everyone?". No answer.
So from that point forward, nobody was watching proxy traffic. We eventually threw up a DansGuardian server but we exempted the upper administration and I.T. So essentially the stooges in other units couldn't go to certain places.
Remember, this is the state where a citizen who was being harassed recorded the officer, and was convicted of a crime for breaking the state's law against recording police. This is the state where all the courts, all the way through the state supreme court, upheld that travesty.
This is also the state that pulled the same shit years later on a lawyer, who then skipped the state courts and went straight to federal court, who had very very unkind things to say about that law and the state supreme court ;-)
Just anecdotal, but when I was a volunteer firefighter the local police had the combination to the fire stations so they could go in, use the bathroom, and catch up on paperwork. So very often I'd find a cop sitting in the day room, feet up on the coffee table, soda in one hand TV remote in the other and no paperwork in sight. Every time I would think "I pay this guy's salary with my tax dollars." Also, just like dash cameras and audio recordings, this data could be used to back up a police officer's story if he is being accused of something, or to pinpoint his location if he needs help and can't radio. So I wholeheartedly agree, for so many reasons, that they should be tracked when on the clock. I'd also be okay with a system that uploads the dash camera video so that nothing unfortunate happens to the data.
School bus drivers don't need to have their shit together?
If there was ever an actual 'think of the children' need, that would be it.
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
On the off chance that you went into law enforcement to serve the public in a very brave and selfless way it will be pounded out of you in short order or you will no longer work for the department.
Rule 1. Don't rat out fellow officers.
Rule 2. Don't make them look bad.
Rule 3. When your benefits are threatened make sure crime goes up.
Rule 4. There are the police and everyone else.
Fuck the police. They are badge wearing gang bangers who murder people and get away with it.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
why would cops think that they would be excluded in a police state?
You guys don't get it - cops aren't against this because it'll catch them breaking the law, they do that all the time now with impunity. They're against it because their boss will be able to see them taking naps in parking lots.
The only way you get to a cop is to threaten to take away their OT, tenure, or pension.
I think that's ass-backwards, but I guess that's just me.
Yeah, I've heard about the Rampart squad on the LAPD, and I know all about the abuses of the NYPD. But to say "Fuck the police. They are badge wearing gang bangers who murder people and get away with it?" No, that's beyond the pale. You're applying a general mis-informed malicious stereotype against millions of people. *Some* of them are probably close to what you describe. But MOST are not--they're tax-paying citizens who get up every morning, put on a Kevlar vest, a uniform, and a badge, and go out to deal with the best AND the worst of humanity. It's the Highway Patrolman who climbs into an ambulance to hold the hand of a severely-injured driver who has no one else there for her; it's the city beat cop who arrests the crack-addicted mother and then takes her child in for the first warm meal and a safe bed that the child's known in weeks--if not years; it's the sheriff's deputy who kicks down the door and discovers that the old man is a mentally-deranged cat hoarder and saves the lives of dozens of mal-nourished sick felines. It's the Detective who reopens a cold case, solves it, and brings peace & closure at last to a grieving family. You, on the other hand, well... I doubt I could say anything nice about you if I got to know you.
Here's to hot beer, cold women, and Glaswegian kisses for all.
>I was completely onboard with your comment until this last line. Grouping all law enforcement and then dragging them through the dirt like you did is disgraceful.
>Please kindly fuck right the fuck off, and don't call 911 next time you or your property are in jeopardy...
Except that it's become largely true. You can find many, many examples of it. Most recently, cops firing into a minivan after the officer immediately started escalating a routine traffic stop and made a family fear for its life enough to try and get away from the police. There is no doubt that the woman in the minivan was in the wrong, but the police responded with violence, anger and deadly force on an unarmed woman and her children.
Until this kind of thing is no longer the norm - much less, stops - then a big segment of the public is going to see the police as thugs. And they're right.
...Steve
This
This
This
This
This
Calling 911 when you life is in danger rarely does any good. Even when it is not screwed up chances of the police showing up in time to stop what you think is about to happen to you are small indeed.
Cops protect cops.
How many cop murders go unsolved? Not many. Why? Because when a cop gets murdered cops think it is important to catch that person. It is not very important to catch your murderer though.
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
What do you call a person who takes an oath to protect and serve the public but ignores it when it is a fellow cop causing the problems?
I can tell you this. I do not call them "Good Cops".
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?