3 ms·
One challenge with AMBER alerts is that they don't provide enough information for the receiver to determine if the alert reflects a credible danger to a child,
by addaon 3y ago
One challenge with AMBER alerts is that they don't provide enough information for the receiver to determine if the alert reflects a credible danger to a child, or if it's a nuisance alert where the system is being abused during a custody battle. Further, the very nature of a highly disruptive, high volume alert like this is to encourage the public to take extreme action -- e.g. following a vehicle -- that increases danger for both the involved child and everyone else in the area. While there are attempts to fix this very broken system (e.g. [1]), for now I very much consider the cure to be potentially worse than the disease.
[1] https://kutv.com/news/local/law-introduced-for-new-criteria-on-issuing-amber-alert-including-parental-custody-battles-amendment-bill-abducted-child-utah https://kutv.com/news/local/law-introduced-for-new-criteria-...
- ineedasername 3y ago>e.g. following a vehicle... the cure to be potentially worse than the disease I'm not aware of citizen vehicle chases being a systemic problem. What other offsetting problems exist that negate the benefits of the system? I don't consider annoyance/disturbance to be sufficient to say it's worse than the disease (which implies it should be stopped, pending overhaul) especially considering the ability to turn the alerts off.