3 ms·
For the reasons I've laid out, I see no reason whatsoever why law enforcement should use or have any such technology at all. If at all, this kind of technology
by jonathanstrange 7y ago
For the reasons I've laid out, I see no reason whatsoever why law enforcement should use or have any such technology at all. If at all, this kind of technology should be used by social workers, maybe even under some additional protection and oath of confidentiality like lawyers and doctors have. That way, I could see some real beneficial crime prevention effects. However, the idea that potential troublemakers and delinquents might freely talk to the police and therefore "get on the right path" in their life seems hilariously naive and far from reality. If you look at what police patrols have to deal with on a daily basis - a lot of it is related to alcohol abuse and mental health -, then you have to conclude that the police is mostly the wrong authority to deal with these problems. This is not just my assessment, it's actually very common for the police themselves to demand that other state authorities should do more about problems of mental health, alcohol abuse, and domestic abuse. Most of the time, the police neither has the training, nor the authority, nor the time to deal with these problems adequately, and they openly talk about this in interviews.
- DanBC 7y agoYou've just converted the risk from "could be convicted of a crime if the state can prove that beyond all reasonable doubt" into "could lose their children if the state can prove it on the balance of probabilities", which feels worse to me.
- mar77i 7y ago...isn't that how Alex Jones got rid of his kids' custody?