7 ms·

Fun (mildly related) story - a couple months ago I was pulled over for speeding. I had a very good reason to be doing so IMO (medical). The cop took my license

Fun (mildly related) story - a couple months ago I was pulled over for speeding. I had a very good reason to be doing so IMO (medical). The cop took my license and when he came back to the car said “Mr artificialLimbs, I can see that you don’t like cops. It says that when I pull up your records”. 1.)I have no idea why they think this, especially since I donate to the state troopers every year. I may cancel that subscription… 2.)WTF I live in the U.S. If this profiling doesn’t directly violate laws, it certainly violates the spirit of “All men are created equal”. I am considering filing FOIA for video and all records pertaining to myself to find out exactly what he meant, and then writing congresscritters. *edit spelling

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kypro 5y ago
This really highlights how incorrect the “nothing to fear, nothing to hide” argument is. With enough data anything we say or do which someone with authority doesn’t like can be used against us, either directly as a means to criminalise us or indirectly as a motive to find some reason to criminalise us.
- Robelius 5y ago
  Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. They’re explicit in saying how they will use information.
  - SilasX 5y ago
    That statement is the Miranda warning and refers to statements made during custodial interrogation. But yes, it does feel eerily true in general now.
    - cryptonector 5y ago
      It's also true of statements made prior to custodial interrogation, it's just that the police don't have to read you your Miranda warning prior to taking you into custody. This means that you have to be super careful when speaking to the police at all. And by super careful I meant: don't. Watch professor James Duane's videos on the topic, and Don't Talk to Police. Also, if arrested, you can't just stay quiet: since Salinas v. Texas the defendant must actually invoke their 5th amendment right to keep quiet before actually keeping quiet, otherwise their keeping quiet... can be used against them in a court of law. You'll learn that from watching professor Duane's videos.
  - newsyyswen 5y ago
    But that's only true after they read you the Miranda rights. Officers need to say those words so that the accused understands that their statements will be taken seriously in the immediate future. It's not supposed to refer to anything that you have ever or will ever say in perpetuity...
- lostcolony 5y ago
  Also anything you don't say or do, given the anecdote. Which is just as relevant; without a well protected right to privacy against law enforcement, an unfounded claim is just as valid as a founded one, since there isn't any vetting. -Hopefully- there will be if a case is ever prosecuted, but there's a lot police can do to you to make your life miserable without requiring criminal prosecution and the burden on evidence that that entails.
throwaway75787 5y ago
He was testing you. Possible inferiority complex in the face of whatever your legitimate reason was.
- whatshisface 5y ago
  I think perhaps that should be stepped down from a "he was" to a "he could have been."
  - rhizome 5y ago
    Well, there's basically no legal way that that kind of information is in the databases accessible via his car computer, so he's already lying by saying "you don't like police" and "it says that when I pull up your records." Police also protect their tools with a fierce secrecy, so they don't just banter about what they can access on their computers, especially when that would mean they're revealing functionality or data that doesn't have a compelling government interest, unless they're lying about it. You can step it back up yourself by turning the question around: by what mechanism, process, or law would your opinion of the police appear on a screen in a police car? In my book, as far as surveillance or internet comments (etc.) information getting used at traffic stops goes, that's an extraordinary claim begging for extraordinary evidence. Ancillary links: Difficulty of retaining a wide spectrum of information: https://apnews.com/article/us-news-police-lawsuits-maine-law-enforcement-agencies-2740bacbfd299fa44d27242b4f32e5d8 https://apnews.com/article/us-news-police-lawsuits-maine-law... Random information comes from in-office access: https://apnews.com/699236946e3140659fff8a2362e16f43/ap-across-us-police-officers-abuse-confidential-databases https://apnews.com/699236946e3140659fff8a2362e16f43/ap-acros... Basis for investigation not at traffic stops: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/when-police-surveillance-meets-internet-things https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/when... Maybe something more detailed can be found here: https://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-3493_72291-294063--,00.html https://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-3493_72291-294063-...
    - leetcrew 5y ago
      I'm not sure exactly what kind of mechanism they have to track such information, but some departments clearly do keep tabs on people who are vocally hostile towards police. take a look at this video if you have a minute. dispatch explicitly warns the officer that the guy has said threatening things about police on social media. unfortunately, the encounter ends in a (very likely) unjustified shooting of an unarmed suspect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFWR73R9G3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFWR73R9G3E
LatteLazy 5y ago
Aren't law enforcement immune from FOIA requests?
- barbacoa 5y ago
  Police have qualified immunity but not from FOIA (or their state equivalent laws).
  - LatteLazy 5y ago
    Actually they sort of do: https://www.justice.gov/oip/foia-guide-2004-edition-exemption-7 https://www.justice.gov/oip/foia-guide-2004-edition-exemptio... Nothing that might reveal their investigations among other things. And who decides what is covered? The police themselves...
dTal 5y ago
>I donate to the state troopers every year Wait, what? ...are they not tax-funded? Forgive me, it's your money, but are underfunded state troopers such a problem that there's nowhere else you'd rather put your charity?
- e40 5y ago
  I've been getting calls for years at home where the caller would say "Mr XXX, this is the police" and then a pause and then "don't worry, we're just calling to talk to you about <some charity event>". I have friends who tell me they always donate because they are afraid of repercussions. Lately the calls are actually bots, and very good ones. I had a short conversation with one and I thought they were human, before I hung up. Next call sounded exactly like the first, so I asked "are you human?" and after asking 2-3 times I got transferred to a human and told them to take me off their list. Haven't been called since.
  - dTal 5y ago
    Um. I don't often swear on HN, but what the fuck. It should go without saying that it is not normal in a civilized society for the police to harass and intimidate random people over the telephone into giving them money - let alone automating it.
    - artificialLimbs 5y ago
      There is no mention above about people being harassed and intimidated.
      - dTal 5y ago
        Yes there is. Phoning someone and saying "This is the police", followed by a pause, is calculated to raise people's heart rate and stress them out. They know that because they follow it up with "don't worry" - people shouldn't be worried in the first place. It deliberately plays on people's fear, and that's despicable. Then there's the fact that some people fear repercussions for not donating. How did they get that impression? An honest misunderstanding, no doubt... Then there's the repeated robocalling. That would certainly harass me.
austincheney 5y ago
> I can see that you don’t like cops. Does it really matter? The result of the encounter would be the same either way, whether or not favorable. The best you can do is not provide anything to confirm an unqualified suspicion.
- artificialLimbs 5y ago
  If the result of the encounter would be the same either way then there is no reason to store the data.
  - austincheney 5y ago
    That doesn’t make any sense. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent
cryptonector 5y ago
> "I can see that you don’t like cops." He's trying to get you to talk. It's like: "where are you going tonight?" (if the answer is "home", then "where from?", if the answer to that is "a restaurant", then you'll get "did you have anything to drink tonight?", and if you answer "yes", then next up is "please step out of the car"). The way to deal with this is to start by asking the office why they stopped you, and then "am I being detained or am I free to go?". The officer will instantly know that you know not to answer his questions about anything other than your name and address, so now all they get to do is find violations to ticket you for -- and well they might, but it will be harder for them to find something serious.
- jancsika 5y ago
  This sounds likely. It's like asking, "So you keep your savings in a box under your bed, huh?" If you reply with exasperation at how the interrogator found out, the irony is that you just told them. :)
- artificialLimbs 5y ago
  No this was weirder than that. He immediately followed up with “but I’m going to cut you a break this time and let you go.” I had told him about the medical emergency. He also informed me “not all of us are bad”.
  - cryptonector 5y ago
    Huh
  - moftz 5y ago
    I got stopped for speeding once and the state trooper followed up the ticket by asking me if I was military or law enforcement because of my demeanor. I had been truthful about the speeding, I said I wasn't paying attention when he asked why I was going 82 in a 55. He had knocked 10mph off the ticket for me and I had thanked him for that. Anything over 80 in my state involves a lot more punishment than just a simple speeding ticket, you have to go to court, pay a bunch of money, and you get extra points on your license which raises your insurance significantly. I was a little taken aback by the question and just said no. I am a fat nerd with shaggy hair and have never been confused for military or law enforcement ever before. I'm not sure if it was just my politeness or there was something more to the question.
matheusmoreira 5y ago
Why would anyone like cops when they keep "records" on random citizens?
LaRenaissance 5y ago
Did he call you by your username "artificialLimbs", or your real name?
raxxorrax 5y ago
It would be interesting which channels they use to get this information. Do you use social media under your real name? Ever signed a petition with your name? Had a run-in with cops at a protest? Would be nice to be able to deduce which sources they have to get arbitrary information like that. And especially wrong information in your case. For all we know you could be subscribed to a newsletter of an org that fights police abuse, your e-mail was leaked and somehow connected to your identity.
Hacktrick 5y ago
Fill that FOIA request right up.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

kypro 5y ago

This really highlights how incorrect the “nothing to fear, nothing to hide” argument is. With enough data anything we say or do which someone with authority doesn’t like can be used against us, either directly as a means to criminalise us or indirectly as a motive to find some reason to criminalise us.

Robelius 5y ago
Anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. They’re explicit in saying how they will use information.
- SilasX 5y ago
  That statement is the Miranda warning and refers to statements made during custodial interrogation. But yes, it does feel eerily true in general now.
  - cryptonector 5y ago
    It's also true of statements made prior to custodial interrogation, it's just that the police don't have to read you your Miranda warning prior to taking you into custody. This means that you have to be super careful when speaking to the police at all. And by super careful I meant: don't. Watch professor James Duane's videos on the topic, and Don't Talk to Police. Also, if arrested, you can't just stay quiet: since Salinas v. Texas the defendant must actually invoke their 5th amendment right to keep quiet before actually keeping quiet, otherwise their keeping quiet... can be used against them in a court of law. You'll learn that from watching professor Duane's videos.
- newsyyswen 5y ago
  But that's only true after they read you the Miranda rights. Officers need to say those words so that the accused understands that their statements will be taken seriously in the immediate future. It's not supposed to refer to anything that you have ever or will ever say in perpetuity...
lostcolony 5y ago
Also anything you don't say or do, given the anecdote. Which is just as relevant; without a well protected right to privacy against law enforcement, an unfounded claim is just as valid as a founded one, since there isn't any vetting. -Hopefully- there will be if a case is ever prosecuted, but there's a lot police can do to you to make your life miserable without requiring criminal prosecution and the burden on evidence that that entails.

throwaway75787 5y ago

He was testing you. Possible inferiority complex in the face of whatever your legitimate reason was.

whatshisface 5y ago
I think perhaps that should be stepped down from a "he was" to a "he could have been."
- rhizome 5y ago
  Well, there's basically no legal way that that kind of information is in the databases accessible via his car computer, so he's already lying by saying "you don't like police" and "it says that when I pull up your records." Police also protect their tools with a fierce secrecy, so they don't just banter about what they can access on their computers, especially when that would mean they're revealing functionality or data that doesn't have a compelling government interest, unless they're lying about it. You can step it back up yourself by turning the question around: by what mechanism, process, or law would your opinion of the police appear on a screen in a police car? In my book, as far as surveillance or internet comments (etc.) information getting used at traffic stops goes, that's an extraordinary claim begging for extraordinary evidence. Ancillary links: Difficulty of retaining a wide spectrum of information: https://apnews.com/article/us-news-police-lawsuits-maine-law-enforcement-agencies-2740bacbfd299fa44d27242b4f32e5d8 https://apnews.com/article/us-news-police-lawsuits-maine-law... Random information comes from in-office access: https://apnews.com/699236946e3140659fff8a2362e16f43/ap-across-us-police-officers-abuse-confidential-databases https://apnews.com/699236946e3140659fff8a2362e16f43/ap-acros... Basis for investigation not at traffic stops: https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/when-police-surveillance-meets-internet-things https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/when... Maybe something more detailed can be found here: https://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-3493_72291-294063--,00.html https://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-3493_72291-294063-...
  - leetcrew 5y ago
    I'm not sure exactly what kind of mechanism they have to track such information, but some departments clearly do keep tabs on people who are vocally hostile towards police. take a look at this video if you have a minute. dispatch explicitly warns the officer that the guy has said threatening things about police on social media. unfortunately, the encounter ends in a (very likely) unjustified shooting of an unarmed suspect. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFWR73R9G3E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AFWR73R9G3E

LatteLazy 5y ago

Aren't law enforcement immune from FOIA requests?

barbacoa 5y ago
Police have qualified immunity but not from FOIA (or their state equivalent laws).
- LatteLazy 5y ago
  Actually they sort of do: https://www.justice.gov/oip/foia-guide-2004-edition-exemption-7 https://www.justice.gov/oip/foia-guide-2004-edition-exemptio... Nothing that might reveal their investigations among other things. And who decides what is covered? The police themselves...

dTal 5y ago

>I donate to the state troopers every year Wait, what? ...are they not tax-funded? Forgive me, it's your money, but are underfunded state troopers such a problem that there's nowhere else you'd rather put your charity?

e40 5y ago
I've been getting calls for years at home where the caller would say "Mr XXX, this is the police" and then a pause and then "don't worry, we're just calling to talk to you about <some charity event>". I have friends who tell me they always donate because they are afraid of repercussions. Lately the calls are actually bots, and very good ones. I had a short conversation with one and I thought they were human, before I hung up. Next call sounded exactly like the first, so I asked "are you human?" and after asking 2-3 times I got transferred to a human and told them to take me off their list. Haven't been called since.
- dTal 5y ago
  Um. I don't often swear on HN, but what the fuck. It should go without saying that it is not normal in a civilized society for the police to harass and intimidate random people over the telephone into giving them money - let alone automating it.
  - artificialLimbs 5y ago
    There is no mention above about people being harassed and intimidated.
    - dTal 5y ago
      Yes there is. Phoning someone and saying "This is the police", followed by a pause, is calculated to raise people's heart rate and stress them out. They know that because they follow it up with "don't worry" - people shouldn't be worried in the first place. It deliberately plays on people's fear, and that's despicable. Then there's the fact that some people fear repercussions for not donating. How did they get that impression? An honest misunderstanding, no doubt... Then there's the repeated robocalling. That would certainly harass me.

austincheney 5y ago

> I can see that you don’t like cops. Does it really matter? The result of the encounter would be the same either way, whether or not favorable. The best you can do is not provide anything to confirm an unqualified suspicion.

artificialLimbs 5y ago
If the result of the encounter would be the same either way then there is no reason to store the data.
- austincheney 5y ago
  That doesn’t make any sense. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirming_the_consequent

cryptonector 5y ago

> "I can see that you don’t like cops." He's trying to get you to talk. It's like: "where are you going tonight?" (if the answer is "home", then "where from?", if the answer to that is "a restaurant", then you'll get "did you have anything to drink tonight?", and if you answer "yes", then next up is "please step out of the car"). The way to deal with this is to start by asking the office why they stopped you, and then "am I being detained or am I free to go?". The officer will instantly know that you know not to answer his questions about anything other than your name and address, so now all they get to do is find violations to ticket you for -- and well they might, but it will be harder for them to find something serious.

jancsika 5y ago
This sounds likely. It's like asking, "So you keep your savings in a box under your bed, huh?" If you reply with exasperation at how the interrogator found out, the irony is that you just told them. :)
artificialLimbs 5y ago
No this was weirder than that. He immediately followed up with “but I’m going to cut you a break this time and let you go.” I had told him about the medical emergency. He also informed me “not all of us are bad”.
- cryptonector 5y ago
  Huh
- moftz 5y ago
  I got stopped for speeding once and the state trooper followed up the ticket by asking me if I was military or law enforcement because of my demeanor. I had been truthful about the speeding, I said I wasn't paying attention when he asked why I was going 82 in a 55. He had knocked 10mph off the ticket for me and I had thanked him for that. Anything over 80 in my state involves a lot more punishment than just a simple speeding ticket, you have to go to court, pay a bunch of money, and you get extra points on your license which raises your insurance significantly. I was a little taken aback by the question and just said no. I am a fat nerd with shaggy hair and have never been confused for military or law enforcement ever before. I'm not sure if it was just my politeness or there was something more to the question.

matheusmoreira 5y ago

Why would anyone like cops when they keep "records" on random citizens?

LaRenaissance 5y ago

Did he call you by your username "artificialLimbs", or your real name?

raxxorrax 5y ago

It would be interesting which channels they use to get this information. Do you use social media under your real name? Ever signed a petition with your name? Had a run-in with cops at a protest? Would be nice to be able to deduce which sources they have to get arbitrary information like that. And especially wrong information in your case. For all we know you could be subscribed to a newsletter of an org that fights police abuse, your e-mail was leaked and somehow connected to your identity.

Hacktrick 5y ago

Fill that FOIA request right up.