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!!!]
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.
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.
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.
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.
Well, to me it comes down to "trust, but verify".
The police are the ones who hold all of the power in an exchange with citizens; and there have certainly been cases where police have shot someone (or whatever), claimed it happened in a specific way -- and only when someone's cellphone video surfaces do we realize the cops were completely lying to us.
In fact, we often see that several officers conspired to give us a story to make themselves look better in the exchange. And then the review board reviews it and determines there was no bad behavior.
So, from a perspective of "who watches the watchers", I'm of the opinion that police, government, and agencies like the NSA need to be under really close scrutiny to prevent them from committing widespread abuses.
Us little people have far less recourse when it comes down to our word against theirs. Which means we need to be objectively verifying what they say and matching it with what really happened.
Unless you want to live in a world where the police can be as corrupt as they feel, and generally act like criminals and get away with it -- monitoring what your police officers are doing is far less intrusive on individual rights than just letting them do what they want.
Police can pretty much ruin your life (or take it in some cases). So the stakes of what they're doing is far higher, and needs to be held to a higher standard. And if it requires actively monitoring them to achieve that, then tough for the police.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
OK, guys, no cruisers within 20 minutes from here - let's hit them.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
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"
Police are not part of the military (yet)
Oh, they crossed that line a long time ago. When they're buying armoured vehicles, and tanks for the streets of the U.S., I think we can safely drop the pretense. Just par for the course these days, sadly.
The cow says "Moo." The dog says "Woof." The Timothy says "Thanks, valued customer. We appreciate your input."
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.
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.
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?
No, that's exactly what they've evolved into. Today, they are armed and armored paramilitary who destroy innocent lives and maintain a culture of isolation and privilege.
Just for example... and then there is this...
There's your "most." And mind you, these are just the screwups that have come to light. For every one on that map, there are hundreds or thousands more where no one reports anything because to do so puts you on the police radar, the last place any self-aware citizen wants to be. The idealized view of police forces has for some time diverged greatly from the reality. I doubt you could find a single police department in the USA that isn't corrupt, holding the blue line, handing out favors, etc., and let me take care to include legislators, lawyers and judges in this condemnation. The system is just barely functional enough that it doesn't fall apart, and little more. As the previous posted said, if you do enter into this kind of public service with the idea to serve and protect, that attitude will be most thoroughly adjusted within a short span of time.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.