4 ms·
Absolutely at the moment. That stops being okay once amber alerts start to be misused.
by noja 10y ago
Absolutely at the moment. That stops being okay once amber alerts start to be misused.
- fidget 10y agoI mean, it's been 20 years, and people seem to be using them sensibly still. I'm not convinced their misuse is a given.
- macintux 10y agoNot a given, but mass surveillance might change the equation.
- sokoloff 10y agoHere's where I believe "think of the children" madness works in favor of people who think like I do. Law enforcement and the DoJ will be very reluctant to start issuing Amber Alerts for drug dealers, bank robbers, bail skippers, and the like. Even missing elderly get Silver Alerts (where they could have just as easily be lumped into Amber Alerts). Amber Alerts for my area come to my cell phone and I can't recall getting more than one per year. Looking up stats for 2014, they ranged from 9-21 per month (nationwide). I'm pretty comfortable that surveillance over-reaches will be a long time coming to Amber Alerts (if ever).
- FilterSweep 10y agoFWIW, Amber Alerts have already begun to include domestic custody battles, and whether one considers bringing the general public into a domestic dispute is an overreach or not, I guess is up to you. In my area, until I turned them off, I received at least 2 alerts per week and the vast majority of these were domestic-related (as in, one true parent of the child had the child when they were not legally allotted to - and the other parent reported it).
- mikestew 10y agoFWIW, Amber Alerts have already begun to include domestic custody battles From my observation Amber Alerts have always been domestic squabbles. Before I turned them off on every device in the house, I don't recall a one that wasn't a divorce dispute. In other words, not a one was a reason to make every phone in the office make noise. In other other words, we collectively found out that all of these "abductions" wouldn't fit within the definition that most of us use for the word.