Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Your Phone May Send You 'Blue Alerts' To Warn You When Local Police Are In Danger (androidpolice.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the for-you-information dept.

The FCC recently announced a new alert program called "Blue Alert" that will notify the public of threats to law enforcement in real time. "With the creation of a dedicated Blue Alert event code in the Emergency Alert System, state and local law enforcement will have the capability to push immediate warnings out to the public via broadcast, cable, and satellite providers, as well as to consumer smartphones through the Wireless Emergency Alert system," reports Android Police. From the report: Much like both the SILVER and AMBER alert programs, and utilizing the same notification system, Blue Alerts aim to warn the general public of threats to public safety and/or imminent danger. However, the police force focused alert system provides timely information to the public when police officers may be in danger. Chairman of the FCC and recent deregulator of the internet, Ajit Pai detailed the new FCC order saying, "Similar to the Amber Alerts that many are familiar with, Blue Alerts will enable authorities to warn the public when there is actionable information related to a law enforcement officer who is missing, seriously injured or killed in the line of duty, or when there is an imminent credible threat to an officer."

The December 14 order from the FCC activates the Blue Alerts service for one calendar year to deliver the notifications over the Emergency Alert System, and for 18 months over the Wireless Emergency Alert system.

62 of 318 comments (clear)

  1. Please, no... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yes, this is a good idea, let's all converge on the scene of a shootout... Or whatever.

    On the one hand, with typical "police behavior", often we are lucky when there are "citizen" observers.

    On ywt another hand, this presents a safety danger with unknown consistences many of which are not good.

    Another aspect that comes to mind is that this is just one more step in the direction of a "Police State" where our Law Enforcement are seen as some holy religious order, our Priests in Blue... We've all seen these 200 car processions when a police officer is killed in the line of duty...

    I don't think this is a well thought-out idea.

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Please, no... by jdavidb · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I think it's well thought out by those who want a police state where we view law enforcement as holy priests in blue. I don't want it, either.

      --
      Secession is the right of all sentient beings.
    2. Re: Please, no... by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't want to kill cops, but I also don't care about them any more than I care about people in general. This new program is a clear example of "mission creep", and the likely result will be more people opting out of the increasingly stupid and pointless alerts.

    3. Re:Please, no... by Trailer+Trash · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I can imagine it now:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

      And:

      https://twitchy.com/brettt-313...

      "CNN is reporting is an 18-mile-long funeral procession for Officer Charles “Joe” Gliniewicz"

      --
      Do you have ESP?
    4. Re:Please, no... by Plus1Entropy · · Score: 2

      It's OK, I already think cops are way better than priests.

      --
      Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
    5. Re: Please, no... by retchdog · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Oh, of course it won't provide any information; it'll just tell people, at most that police are being shot at in their neighborhood. They'll just turn it on every so often when they need to rile up the public or when there is an unwanted protest happening. Hell, maybe they'll even use it appropriately a few times, but even then, it might as well just flash "PANIC!" on the screen.

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
    6. Re: Please, no... by JohnFen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A million times this.

      It's pretty baffling to me how anyone thinks this is a valuable thing to have. Cops have power and do a job knowing that they may occasionally be put into danger (although being a cop isn't even in the top 10 most dangerous professions, so there's that).

      That's a world of difference from helpless and innocent children being abducted, or being alerted to some imminent public danger.

      Although, I have to admit, I opted out once Amber alerts were brought on board. That was already too much mission creep for me.

    7. Re:Please, no... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Police represent the State.
      Police/State under threat.
      SMS invokes a well regulated militia to come to the State's aid.

      In the event that our Law Enforcement ever needs a "well regulated" militia, they're not going to find it by alerting a bunch of fat red-necks in tactical vest with AR-15's and such. What is meant by "well regulated militia" is called the National Guard .

      For example when Katrina went down and the National Guard was called out.

      Or that big earth quake in California. The National Guard was called out.

      Or the situation with wild fires. The National Guard is helping on that one, too.

      Or massive flooding in the Mississippi River drainage - I believe the National Guard helped out on that one.

      Or back on 9/11, the National Guard was called out to secure airports...

      See the trend in these examples?

      --
      If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    8. Re:Please, no... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 4, Informative

      Oh, for fuck's sake, the National Guard is not the militia. They are part of the official armed forces of the US government. The militia is all male citizens from 18-45 able to bear arms. You classist bigoted slur is noted right along with your ignorance of the Constitution.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    9. Re: Please, no... by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Although, I have to admit, I opted out once Amber alerts were brought on board. That was already too much mission creep for me.

      I thought Amber Alerts were a pretty good idea until I got one in the middle of the night for a little girl who had already been found. Then I shut them off.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    10. Re:Please, no... by grumpy_old_grandpa · · Score: 2

      Here's a news flash: The US has been a fully operational police state since end of 2001. But if you want to get technical, I guess Nixson's 1960s would be just as valid a milestone. Read "Rise of the warrior cop" by Radley Balko if you want to know more.

      The state, its branches of government, has lost all meaningful control over the domestic legal monopoly of violence. The federal and local police now operate semi-autonomously, with large incomes through civil forfeiture, sizable contributions from military surplus, and a legal code which is far removed from the law of the land the rest of us follow. Legislators have tried and failed to reverse this trend.

      The question now is, does the US need to go to full totalitarian state or dictatorship before it can be fixed through force, or is there a peaceful way back to a functional state. There are very few cases of historical powers of this magnitude and force which were rectified through peaceful means. The decline of the British Empire and the fall of Soviet Union comes to mind. However, somehow I fail to see the US simply walking away from it all. The motto is "from my cold dead hands", and that's the way I can see it going down.

    11. Re: Please, no... by atrex · · Score: 2

      Yeah, this is dumb. Cops are trained and paid to "Serve and Protect" the citizenry, the citizens aren't supposed to need to come to the aid of the cops. This only makes even remote sense for off-duty police officers.

    12. Re: Please, no... by Lord+Kano · · Score: 2

      I am a supporter of BLM and no, I don't want to kill cops. I just want them to go to prison when they kill innocent people.

      LK

      --
      "Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
    13. Re:Please, no... by HiThere · · Score: 3

      The National Guard is a well-regulated armed body, but it sure isn't what the writers of the constitution meant by a well-regulated militia. They didn't trust the government. They may have meant a militia that was organized by the local government (as in town or village), but even that isn't clear.

      Remember the founders didn't want there to be ANY standing army. 1812 probably changed a lot of minds, but when you say "well regulated militia" you are invoking the US Constitution Bill of Rights, and at that time most of the founders didn't trust the Federal government, and weren't too sure about the state governments. The constitution is almost entirely about what the government is NOT supposed to do. But there's no decent enforcement, so it tends to get ignored except when major fights come up between powerful groups with both (all?) sides haven't lots of governmental support. If it were really enforced there's no way they could have stretched the clause about interstate commerce to cover a farmer growing something for personal use.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    14. Re: Please, no... by dwillden · · Score: 2

      I turned mine off after getting one for a custody dispute in the middle of the night, for a child three states and at least a 14 hour drive away.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    15. Re: Please, no... by dwillden · · Score: 5, Interesting

      No, a "Well Regulated Militia" is in the definition of the term "Well Regulated" in 1790 a functional militia. That means the citizens who make up the militia have their own arms so that they can be called out by their local community leaders and respond with weapons (and ammo) needed to be a force to contend with. A disarmed populous that has to rely on a government stockpile of weapons being available is not a functional militia. The Minutemen didn't have time to head down to the villiage armory, wait for the armorer to be woken up and issue weapons. They heard the call, grabbed their weapons and responded. The founding fathers knew that. The Battles of Lexington and Concord were directly due to British efforts to confiscate gunpowder stockpiled by the communities. But the militia was able to respond with it's own weapons and history was set.

      Further the Militia Act clearly states that the National Guard is NOT the militia, it is part of the formal US Military. While nominally under control of the local state, it is funded and equipped by the Federal Government and can be called up over a Governor's objection. We the people are the Militia, and if we are not armed we are not a functional or "Well Regulated" militia.

      --
      I'm too lazy to compose a creative sig.
    16. Re:Please, no... by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      Actually, they're both the militia. The National Guard is the "organized militia" and the general body of citizens is the "unorganized militia". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    17. Re:Please, no... by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      No, they're not. The National Guard reports to the governor of the state they're from, not the US Federal government.

      You are so far beyond wrong, it's not funny. No, really. It is literally not funny, because it is so chilling. The National Guard is part of the Army, and the Army is under control of the president. That's why Bush was able to force literally thousands of national guard reservists to go fight (and sometimes die, but more commonly commit suicide) for oil in the desert, and then proceed to keep them there past their release date with a "stop-loss" program (also known as slavery.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    18. Re: Please, no... by Durrik · · Score: 2

      I opted out to all the messages except the weather alerts. I live in Phoenix, and alerts that there is a dust storm coming in is personally important. It will modify my behavior:
      * Am I going to go out grocery shopping, or to a restaurant now, or wait till it blows through?
      * I need to shut off the fresh air intake in the house, and make sure all the doors and windows are closed.
      * Time to break out the beverage of choice and watch the wall of dust roll over the fields.

      Things like that. Those alerts are important since they are personally important to the people they're being sent to. Amber/Silver alerts aren't so important: 'Look out for this Vehicle' 'but I'm at work/home/etc right now.' And when people get on the road they forget what they're suppose to be looking for. So I agree, most of those alerts are useless alerts for people who don't care. But like most cases of generalizations arguments there are exceptions.

      --
      Software Engineer & Writer of Military Science Fiction and Fantasy Blog: petermwright.com Twitter: WrightPeterM
    19. Re: Please, no... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      That's a good idea. What they need is some sort of communication system that cops can use to call in other cops for backup with situations that are getting out of hand.

    20. Re: Please, no... by chihowa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      When cops feel threatened, they start randomly shooting at people.

      This alert is very useful for letting you know that you may want to stay inside and away from windows. If the 'threat' is driving a blue pickup truck, you may want to not drive your blue pickup truck (or white pickup truck, or red car), lest it be turned into swiss cheese.

      It's an alert that the police are off of their leash and won't be held accountable for any damage or injury that they cause.

      --
      If you want a vision of the future, imagine a youtube comments section scrolling - forever.
    21. Re:Please, no... by RKThoadan · · Score: 2

      This isn't a case of "so far beyond wrong." It's a case of confusing nomenclature. States can choose to have a state guard (and even state navy) in addition to the national guard. It get's murky because they are partially regulated by the National Guard but are not otherwise part of the National Guard Command Structure.

      Furthermore, to quote wikipedia: As governors often use state defense forces to augment their state's Army National Guard and Air National Guard units, state defense forces have been both officially and informally called National Guard Reserves. When not on assigned duties by the President the National Guard forces are under the authority of the Governor of the State they are stationed in. So if you see an announcement that your Governor has deployed the National Guard it's likely that he has deployed both the National Guard and the State Guard (if your state has one)

      Wikipedia links:
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

  2. What the fuck are we supposed to do with that? by HotNeedleOfInquiry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Grab our rifles and come help. No future to that.

    --
    "Eve of Destruction", it's not just for old hippies anymore...
    1. Re:What the fuck are we supposed to do with that? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

      No future to that.

      But of course it is the future! It's the police moving to the Über gig independent contractor model.

      An app hails Über cops when the police need backup assistance. The Über cops grab their guns and race to the location to overwhelm the bad guys with shear numbers.

      A Facebook app can take pictures, and tell you from Facebook's faces database who is a good guy, and who is a bad guy, so you don't shoot at the wrong folks.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
  3. When *police* are in danger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How about an app that warns us when police are nearby and can be set to automatically record and stream to chosen sites if they get within ten feet? Cops nowadays are little more than sociopaths in military gear, and I'd rather not I (or possibly even my husband) get raped, killed, and our car arrested on suspicion of resisting.

    Just passing one by is quickly becoming a coin-toss as to whether or not we end up beaten and arrested on trumped-up charges especially if we're black. Police are not the ones that need protecting from anyone.

    1. Re:When *police* are in danger? by CaptainDork · · Score: 5, Funny

      ... PC education/brainwashing system ...

      And for Mac?

      --
      It little behooves the best of us to comment on the rest of us.
    2. Re:When *police* are in danger? by ThanatosMinor · · Score: 3, Funny

      ... PC education/brainwashing system ...

      And for Mac?

      Apple brains come out of the womb pre-washed and knowing all the lyrics to that new U2 album everyone loves so much.

    3. Re:When *police* are in danger? by cenobyte40k · · Score: 3, Insightful

      LOL. I am going to get you are a white male from an upper middle class or better neighborhood.

    4. Re:When *police* are in danger? by ThanatosMinor · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Here's a clue from a responsible adult - if you go into the world and treat the police like an enemy, or teach your kids the same - you are going to be in for a very rough time. Not because of the police - because of your own actions and statements.

      Many people have good reason to believe the police are not there to help them whenever they show up, and that at best they'll be thought of as suspects before victims, and not just suspects but guilty suspects. Trust must be earned. If the police do not have the public's (or any non-empty subset thereof) trust, that is the fault of the police and the criminal justice system as a whole and not that of the public.

      You may be responsible for yourself but you've also been tricked into thinking a police state is a good thing and trying to convince others of the same. But it's a cop's job to protect me, not the other way around. They're public servants and I'm the public so I don't owe the police anywhere near what they owe me. They should smile if I flip them off. Otherwise why am I paying for them?

    5. Re:When *police* are in danger? by SlaveToTheGrind · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Just passing one by is quickly becoming a coin-toss as to whether or not we end up beaten and arrested on trumped-up charges especially if we're black.

      OK, I'll touch the third rail -- I have plenty of karma.

      Coin-toss, eh? Like, 50-50 odds. Guess you're pretty much hosed if you pass 5-6 every day like I do. How am I still alive?

      Oh, because the real numbers are somewhere around 1.5% of encounters where force is used or threatened . (Pro tip: that means the percentage of encounters where force was actually used is less than 1.5% -- about half that, according to the report.)

      This sort of fanciful swill is what passes for "insightful" on Slashdot these days. The nerds are rapidly becoming outnumbered by the brain-dead activists.

    6. Re:When *police* are in danger? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Have you ever wondered about *why* white people from the suburbs are successful? It's not the "white power structure" or racism. It's that we aren't programmed to fail by being told nonsense about how the world actually works.

      Serious question - how would you know you weren't programmed with nonsense about how the world actually works if you've never had to leave the bubble of your white-centric upper-middle class neighborhood?

    7. Re:When *police* are in danger? by atrex · · Score: 2

      There are several kinds of people that police work attracts. Some of them actually do want to make a difference in their communities and protect people. Others want the power that being a police officer gives them to be able to lord it over the commoners. Others want the freedom to enforce their racially biased view points. And some just want to play with guns.

      The fact is that in the U.S. we have a drastically ineffective training system and requirements. IIRC police in the EU get three times as much training as the ones do here in the U.S.

      Additionally, equipping the police with military surplus weaponry and minus the proper training in restraint on when to use that weaponry is an outright recipe for disaster. If you give a kid a cool toy, they're going to want to play with it. And a poorly trained police officer with an assault rifle is far more dangerous than a kid with a BB-gun.

    8. Re:When *police* are in danger? by squiggleslash · · Score: 2

      You're describing the current situation. The GP was describing what should be the case. If the police's job were to protect the public, there'd be no problem with a police state. In practice however, as soon as you have a police state, the police no longer have a duty to protect the public.

      I'm seeing extremes here. But I will say that I don't believe the current set up with the police makes any sense. Their first duty should be protecting the public. The numbers of unpunished needless deaths of innocents who offended their killers by doing things such as "Went to reach for license in pocket when officer was screaming at them to simultaneously keep their hands on the wheel and hand them driver's license" shows, to me, the police are far, far, removed from having the values and mandates that are appropriate.

      And without those mandates there's little point in having a police force. A protection racket might offer "protection" from crime but we wouldn't tolerate that, why do we tolerate a police force that believes it has the right to kill people just because the officer was badly trained (I don't mean not trained, I mean deliberately trained terribly) and scared?

      This needs to stop.

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  4. Great, Now we'll know when to commit robberies. by technosaurus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What a total waste of money, time and infrastructure. Not that any PD would ever use it, but still...

    1. Re:Great, Now we'll know when to commit robberies. by arth1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Don't underestimate the stupidity of people wearing uniform.

      Yes, your subject is spot on. When there's a blue alert, crooks know that their odds of pulling off a heist went way up, because the fuzz will be busy rushing elsewhere. What a gift!

    2. Re:Great, Now we'll know when to commit robberies. by Rakhar · · Score: 2

      Yeah, I can see the supposed positives (informed public, safety in avoiding) but what I can't see is the gains outweighing the negatives. Also, for those positives to function it would leave open a pretty slippery slope to "Well, he had the alert, he should have stayed inside!"

      I think body cams that are on 100% of the time an officer is on the clock are a better idea. Management on the police side just has to be humane about what they do with it. Right now, in my area they aren't even being humane about tracking locations. Cops get reprimanded for wellness checks (you know, the potentially positive side of police work) because it's seen as slacking and taking a break.

  5. Black Alert? by duckintheface · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps a Black Alert to tell the public when unarmed black men are endangered by the police?

    --
    "He took a duck in the face at 250 knots." -- William Gibson, Pattern Recognition
  6. Morbid sense of hurmor here... by SeaFox · · Score: 2

    All I imagine is a group of gang-bangers laughing as their phones go off while they are the cause of the threat.

  7. Umm, OK, whatever by JohnFen · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't have the foggiest notion what this is supposed to accomplish, really. If a situation is such that a cop is seriously endangered, what in the world could I do about it?

    It looks to me like all this does is to further decrease the signal-to-noise ratio in these sorts of things.

  8. Because police lives... by K.+S.+Van+Horn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...matter so much more than yours or mine.

    1. Re:Because police lives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, I did not see anything. No, I did not hear anything. Sorry, wish I could help you, Officer.

  9. Why Would Ordinary People Need This? by mentil · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can see this being useful for off-duty police officers, as there have been cases of them being accosted. However, ordinary people don't need to know every time a police officer gets hurt in a traffic collision (statistically, by far, the leading cause of unnatural serious injury or death to on-duty police.) I could maybe see this as some kind of active shooter alert system... but it's so overbroad it's almost never going to be such a scenario, and people will turn it off/tune it out and never get the message. Furthermore, if I'm hiding from a shooter and my phone starts a siren that can be heard a block away, I'm not gonna be hidden any longer.

    --
    Corruption is convincing someone that the selfless ideal is the same as their selfish ideal.
  10. Re:Who do we call? by geekd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When the cops ARE the danger?

  11. Re:Just for police for now by AHuxley · · Score: 2

    Political parties will follow the public safety messages into your phone.
    Reassuring daily messages from a local government that illegal migrants are welcome in the city?
    Pushed gov updates on what a SJW city council wants to do.
    Daily lists of city services that are free for illegal migrants?
    Once one part of gov gets to push out messages, every part of gov will find a need to send out free party political propaganda.
    Protected by a gov/telco partnership so the messages have to be viewed in the GUI.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  12. DO. NOT. WANT! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How about an app for when real people are in trouble?

  13. Ajit Pai is a disaster by edi_guy · · Score: 2

    Seriously, this guy is a complete tool and needs to be replaced by someone with a clue. GOP is running the show so they can pick their team, but Ajit is going to hurt them in the long run with his terrible choices.

  14. This strikes me as propaganda by rsilvergun · · Score: 4, Insightful

    e.g. something to rile up people and maybe get some more "tough on crime" legislation. I can't think of any other reason to do this. This is not information the public needs to know on a real time basis.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  15. Re:Just for police for now by Daetrin · · Score: 2

    Uh, last i heard the "SJW" crowd tended more toward anti-police sentiments in general while the anti-"SJW"s were all "blue lives matter". So why do you think the "SJW"s are behind a plan to mobilize people to help police?

    Is one of us confused about what "SJW"s want? Or are you just blaming anything you don't agree with on some "SJW cabal" that you've made up in your head?

    --
    This Space Intentionally Left Blank
  16. I just got one of these by jrumney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    BLUE ALERT: Officer has spotted a black man failing to indicate a right turn for at least 3 seconds before starting the maneuver. All residents are advised to remain indoors and definitely do not come out and record the shooting and post to social media.

  17. Re:Amber alerts, lol... by Junta · · Score: 2

    The volume of amber alerts is low, I'm perfectly willing to receive and at least check out a few license plates if that info is provided.

    Sometimes the alert is uselessly vague, a picture could at least help, but describing a fairly common vehicle and/or person in text format doesn't give me anything I could use to help identify. If there is an off chance that it clicks that something looks a bit off and matches the description, ok.

    The silver alerts seem to bit a bit more half-assed. I only know that one exists when one of the electronic signs says "there is a silver alert, *call for more info*, not nearly so aggressive. Generally when you do look into it, it's keep an eye out for person who is liekly to be wandering out of their mind, which when I have seen that I'd call about it regardless.

    I am a bit curious as to the intent of a blue alert. For the other alerts, they want as many people as possible to assisst by looking and calling in. Surely for a blue alert they already know what is up and don't need help. If it is to keep bystanders out, it seems a weird way of phrasing it.

    --
    XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  18. This should be fun by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 4, Insightful

    'Blue Alerts' To Warn You When Local Police Are In Danger

    Now we'll all get pestered whenever someone points a camera at the police.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
  19. Amazingly stupid by SigmaTao · · Score: 2

    1) I have no idea what they are hoping people do with that information. So the result will be random at best.
    2) It seems like a way to crowd source mobs to attack the police.
    3) It's the kind of feedback criminals can use to infer where the police are focused.
    4) It's also a method by which criminals can cause an event to distract the police or upset the systemic responses of police.
    5) It provides a signal for people to come an watch / video - actually attracting innocent by-standers.
    6) If the system is hijacked, it allows a great way of confusing and disrupting the police.
    7) It creates the avenue to create fake blue signals to produce panic and inappropriate responses in both the population and police.

    1. Re:Amazingly stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      It's pretty obvious what the people are supposed to do with this information. People should feel fear. They should also empathize with the police officer(s) in danger and be reminded of the police force's dedication to protecting and serving. There is no "actionable item" for a civilian beyond feeling these emotions.

      At best, the potential abuses you outlined exist out of ignorance. At worst, they are features of the platform meant to put police officers in harm's way to justify the ongoing deterioration of American rights.

  20. FOIA and create an app from that data by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If a city wants to track crime then put that free data to good use and create a useful app for good people.

    Buy up an entire towns worth of data on every person, home, crime and layer it.
    Not just the open free city data, all the pay to view private sector data that is collected on crime.
    Get all the data on crime, generations of criminals, insurance costs, rent costs, number of people sharing a home. All the hidden statistics that really show what a part of the USA is really like over the decades.
    Layer the numbers, crimes over an interactive real time map.
    Then FOIA the Blue Alert event code and layer that on top.

    Sell a demographics app to warn people from outside the city, the better parts of a town that they are entering a bad part of the town.
    A nice friendly bright normal map GUI in the safe areas.

    The more darker, gloomy colors with voice and GUI when entering an area that should always be avoided. A final apex predator warning for the no-go area parts of a city.

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
  21. Victim blaming? Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    You're saying that all those unarmed black men killed by cops brought it on themselves?

  22. Re:Black Alert? by santiago · · Score: 2

    Perhaps a Black Alert to tell the public when unarmed black men are endangered by the police?

    If that's implemented, it'll just result in everyone's phones loudly buzzing continuously until the batteries run out.

  23. Re:Amber alerts, lol... by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 4, Informative

    Exactly. This one would be switched off immediately.

    I mean, Emergency Alerts? Yeah, definitely. If there's a tornado or wildfire or something bearing down on me, it'd be nice to be notified (and not necessarily have to sit there with a TV/Radio on, just in case). AMBER alerts? Well, okay, I suppose that's helpful in certain situations and, besides, I turn it off anyway for much the same reason. I'd leave it on if it could be made smarter. I don't need this alert at 4:00AM when I'm sleeping, but it might be nice if it would store it so that when I start driving to work, it'll pop-up and say, "Hey, keep an eye out for a blue chevy..."

    I might understand something like this for a very narrow area--for example, if police are looking for a suspect hiding in your area, an alert to the people the, say, 12 block cordoned-off area saying that they should lock their doors and be on the lookout for a guy in a green hoodie might be useful. But I think this already exists.

    Again, this system is supposed to be useful for me. How is this proposed system helpful for me?

  24. What about "Black & Blue" Alerts? by gerald.edward.butler · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Will they send "Black & Blue" Alerts whenever the police are beating the shit out of someone who is subdued? Will they send "Black & Red" Alerts whenever the cops unload their magazines into unarmed suspects? Will they send "Yellow & Blue" Alerts when they Tazer grandmothers? Will they send "Spotted Alerts" whenever they shoot someones dog? Will they send "White" Alerts when they shoot babies in their crib during SWAT home invasions? Just wondering.

  25. Bad idea in many ways by joe_frisch · · Score: 2

    First, sending alerts to people who do not need to take immediate specific action will cause many to turn off alerts entirely. I was woken by one of the large scale Amber alerts - about a child kidnapped 300 MILES from my house. So I've turned off all the alerts that I can.

    Secondly, there is no specific action for people to take when police are in distress. I can't imagine that the police want a bunch of armed citizens with no situational awareness converging on the site of some emergency. Seems like that will make almost any situation worse.

    Finally, while I believe that most police do a good service to the community, I do not seem them as being unusually noble or risk-taking. Firemen, pilots, and roofers and many others are also exposed to danger while serving the community. Why not an "asphalt alert" when a roofer falls and is injured?

  26. I feel like I'm being trolled by RonVNX · · Score: 2

    Policeman doesn't even crack the top 10 most dangerous jobs in the USA. What's next, Tree Service worker in danger alerts?

  27. Why is this my problem? by rossz · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Since the police have no legal duty to protect my ass, why should I care if they are in danger? Am I supposed to grab a gun and run to their rescue - probably getting shot by cops in the process since they such scared little girls who like to shoot people?

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
  28. Mutual Aid. Use THAT. Not amateurs by RubberDogBone · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I used to listen to a police scanner a lot. I mean, a LOT lot. Had radios at home, in my car, and even a handheld to keep me tuned in even on the toilet. No I didn't have a girlfriend at the time, how did you possibly guess? Geez. Mindreaders.

    Anyway, the thing with scanners is you know what the hell is happening, to an extent, as soon as the police do. It can drive spikes in blood pressure listening to a traffic stop turn into a shootout, etc etc. And I had issues with that and the fact the the number one rule, as such, about listening to scanner stuff is never ever never ever never go to the scenes of what you hear. Stay the hell out of it.

    Eventually, the local PD moved to a trunked radio system and none of my radios could hear them. A girlfriend model was acquired and it didn't like listening to police radios either. So I quit. I have no clue what my local PD is doing and I don't care.

    I do not need or want shit alerts showing up to tell me they ran out of dougnuts or some bullshit deemed a police emergency. If they have an emergency, fuck it, they have mutual aid agreements with ALL the adjacent police agencies. They can call up those folks and get trained, real cops to come help. Do that thing. Don't try to get amateurs into the act. The Pros are bad enough,

    --
    Sig for hire.