Slashdot Mirror
NYPD To Google: Stop Revealing the Location of Police Checkpoints (nypost.com)
schwit1 shares a report from the New York Post: The NYPD is calling on Google to yank a feature from its Waze traffic app that tips off drivers to police checkpoints -- warning it could be considered "criminal conduct," according to a report on Wednesday. The department sent a cease-and-desist letter over the weekend demanding Google disable the crowd-sourced app's function that allows motorists to pinpoint police whereabouts, StreetsBlog reported. "Individuals who post the locations of DWI checkpoints may be engaging in criminal conduct since such actions could be intentional attempts to prevent and/or impair the administration of the DWI laws and other relevant criminal and traffic laws," wrote Acting Deputy Commissioner for Legal Matters Ann Prunty in the letter, according to the website. My $0.02 is that the NYPD loses on first amendment grounds.
SOTU to NYPD: STFU
About 5-10 years ago, there was a Supreme Court opinion that said people flashing their headlights to indicate a police presence was a 1st amendment right.
When did policing in the United States become gestapo-like? I mean, it's always been that way for certain minority groups. I get that. But now it's just across the board, from local cops to staties to border patrol and that deepest of the deep state, ICE (who is actually not under the jurisdiction of any US court, if you can believe that).
It's gotten to the point that anyone who wears a badge is the enemy. Cops in neo-Nazi gangs. Well, maybe not park rangers, but everyone else? Fuck them.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The article talks both of DWI and of other speed and safety traps.
The goal for speed enforcement is (or should be) for drivers to slow traffic down to the speed limit and drive safely. When the alerts show up, that is exactly what drivers do near the checkpoint. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED, at least in that zone.
What they should be asking for is inserting extra markers when dangerous conditions are forming, so those app users can reduce traffic speeds before a crash occurs.
//TODO: Think of witty sig statement
This app also assists Lawful and Non-Impaired drivers in avoiding the inconvenience or uncomfortable situation of happening upon an unexpected checkpoint and possibly becoming subject to some search or test that they wish to avoid.
In other words.... this functionality has lawful and beneficial uses, contrary to what their letter suggests.
Furthermore, the submission, sharing, and dissemination of this information about government activity is speech of a political nature among the types of speech most strongly protected by the 1st Amendment of the US constitution, which the NYC PD is not above.
Go read the first amendment, and then go fuck yourselves. We have every right to tell each other about unwarranted surveillance.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
The law says you have a right to not be detained without reasonable cause, and freedom in security of your belongings from unwarranted searches.
Checkpoints prevent these lawful protections.
They get around this in some areas by publishing where these checkpoints will be. All of these actions take away rights by claiming exigent circumstances or public interest. Due to well-deserved lawsuits, they have to restore those rights somehow to prevent abuses.
But you're complaining about how those rights are restored. You are backwards.
There is.
TWO FRIENDS ARE DRIVING HOME after a night on the town. A few miles from their freeway exit, they see a sign that reads “Drug Checkpoint 1 Mile Ahead.” There is nothing to worry about—neither party is carrying contraband and the driver is sober. But their exit is only a few miles away and the weary travelers want to avoid the hassle of a stop. The driver takes the first exit he sees after the sign; much to his surprise, he encounters a drug checkpoint located at the bottom of the off-ramp. The bewildered driver turns to his companion and asks; “Can they do that?” Regardless of whether law enforcement can use such tactics, they have.
Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.
Ernest Hemingway
The driver and any passenger face gets some quality CCTV well before any checkpoints.
Any smart phone is detected.
No smart phone detected? Talking at the checkpoint is the voice print.
The constitutionally approved magic is a K9 unit that can alert on command.
That allows for the K9 approved "search"
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
You have not been paying attention.
When you give your money to a company to build the road, they will make sure they own the road.
You will pay for it, though the nose, because they have you over a barrel. But they will own it
And they will charge you extraordinary amounts of money to use it. You and everyone.
Sure, government needs to be watched ( so, why arent we watching ), but corporations need watching too.
The Randian notion that corporate execs are uniformly stalwart pillars of truth, justice and fairness does not seem to apply.
I wish like heck it did, but it dont.
emt 377 emt 4
If they're allowed to get away with this, you can bet it won't be long before they'll be trying once again to make it illegal to video them when they're beating the crap out of somebody.
The police need to be smacked down hard. If you happen to be part of a demographic they don't particularly like, your odds of getting beaten or killed by the cops for no particular reason are higher than your chances of being injured or killed in a terrorist attack.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
No victim, no crime.
Someone hits you, then you own their ass until repaid.
That and voluntarily insuring yourself will cover it.
If nothing else, you sovereign citizen lunatics give me something entertaining to watch on youtube. I love watching your dumb asses blather on about how you're "not driving, you're travelling, and you don't need a license for that!", then get your car window busted out and dragged out of a car while screaming "no victim, no crime." Not sure why, but that amuses me.
Actually on topic... sorry. "Someone hits you, then you own their ass until repaid." So when someone kills my wife/brother/mother/son because they were driving way too fast for conditions and caused an accident I "own them" until they provide me a replacement loved one? I'm not sure if you know, but that's not how things work. Do we incarcerate that person for the rest of their life? Do they owe me some number of millions of dollars? When should I consider myself "repaid"?
Seems to me that a mutual understanding that "this road was designed to handle traffic at 25mph", posting some sort of notice that indicates as such, and paying a couple people to make sure motorists drive within those established guidelines would make a bit more sense.
I am going to remain silent. I want to see a lawyer.
I do not consent to this search.
Am I being detained? Am I free to go?
Am I under arrest? What are the charges?
"I say we take off, nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure."
on YouTube.
Long story short it's a symptom of Tough on Crime Laws and police militarization that's created an "Us vs Them" mentality. The Drug War hurts a lot too since a large percentage of folks smoke pot or know someone who does and that means you're always scared shitless when a cops around since they can arrest you and take your stuff.
The solution's easy: Stop Voting for Tough on Crime politicians, end the Drug war and stop civil asset forfeiture (which was created for the Drug War anyway). There's a few other odds and ends we can do (California has an anti-speed trap law, and properly funding your police so they're not dependent on civil asset forfeiture is a good start) too.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/