8 ms·

Genuine question: is sharing the location or distribution of information about police presence illegal? I assume this would be treated differently if it involve

by wslh 1y ago

Genuine question: is sharing the location or distribution of information about police presence illegal? I assume this would be treated differently if it involved military positions, but I'm curious about how the law applies in this case. Waze is another example of an app where users can share information about police presence or roadblocks, while useful to some, could also be seen as having negative implications depending on the context.

idontwantthis 1y ago
Absolutely not illegal.
throw4565e3 1y ago
Since Waze still has their speed trap reporting feature, I’m guessing it’s still legal.
- mrbombastic 1y ago
  This is now built into google maps
Jtsummers 1y ago
Only if you knew by virtue of something like access to secret information (the things you'd have a security clearance to access). If you see the police are gathered around your local 7-Eleven, you're absolutely free to post it. If you know in advance that the police are going to be performing a raid on a meth house and you got that information by virtue of a security clearance (I assume they do have something of this sort like federal employees have, though I'm not sure the precise mechanisms) then you'd be violating the policies around that access. This could be illegal (just like a fed leaking secret or top secret information). If you know in advance because the police have loose lips, but you are not personally under any kind of confidentiality policy, you're free to post it. So the loose lipped cops at the bars I used to frequent could have caused real problems for themselves.
mingus88 1y ago
Worth pointing out that the question of legality is besides the point if you are purposefully antagonizing the police state. It’s not about legality. It’s about compliance. If you become a target, they will arrest you and drop charges later. They will make you miss work and lose your job. They will set up surveillance on you to catch you doing anything else they want to continue harassment. You don’t have to look hard to see reporting of officers using official databases to settle personal scores. 404 media just did a big expose on ALPR Flock DB abuses
- danudey 1y ago
  Honestly, they'll put you in an ICE detention facility indefinitely. They don't have to drop charges if they don't even have to charge you in the first place, and because they're all hiding behind masks there's no way for them to face any kind of repercussions. Beyond that, Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of sending "homegrowns" to overseas concentration camps, so it won't be long now before you don't have to do anything wrong to be targetted and you don't have any recourse regardless.
  - defrost 1y ago
    Behold the June 11 Justice Dept Memo on wedge applications for "5. Prioritizing Denaturalization" https://www.justice.gov/civil/media/1404046/dl https://www.justice.gov/civil/media/1404046/dl with some discussion at: DOJ Opens Door To Stripping Citizenship Over Politics - https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/doj-opens-door-to-stripping-citizenship-over-politics https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/doj-opens-door-to-strippi... "We can't let those (accused) commies take over New York (even if elected)"
- techdmn 1y ago
  Crowd-sourced flock camera locations: https://deflock.me/ https://deflock.me/
dzhiurgis 1y ago
Waze in NZ removed this feature after threats from police. If you post to local social media groups about DUI checkpoints or mobile speed cameras you’ll be scolded by about 30% of people.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- phatfish 1y ago
  Pretty depressing it is only 30%.
  - ghssds 1y ago
    Why?
    - jhy 1y ago
      Because folks don't want to enable drink-drivers and speeders? Maybe they want to use their roads with some basic level of safety?
      - WaxProlix 1y ago
        True, they should set up child abuse checkpoints too - think of the children after all.
        HaZeust 1y ago
        And check that every single one of your federal papers are present and punctual. We'd hate to have someone that's unbecoming to share a full disclosure of themselves to officers on the road.
        Izkata 1y ago
        Doctors and teachers handle that, since they have regular contract with children. At least in my state they're required by law to report suspected child abuse.
goku12 1y ago
While your question is meaningful and well intentioned, let me point out that it may be inconsequential. The legality of an action is moot when the regime ignores and defies the entire basis of those laws - the constitution. It's like trying to evaluate yourself against a standard that is no longer followed. Instead, evaluate yourself on the basis of your standing with the regime. If they dislike you for any reason including your skin color, they will find some sort of national security threat in your actions. Or they may punish you first and then claim the inability to correct it. On the other hand if they need you, they will completely ignore your actions, including even leaking of extremely sensitive information to unauthorized individuals.
- account42 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - JeanMara 1y ago
    >Deporting people who are in the country illegally Oh? What about people who are permanent residents and are arbitrarily deemed "threat to national security" because of their opposition to Israel? What about the recent denaturalization DOJ unit that was just set up? Are those people "illegally" here too and that is constitutionally valid? The tunnel vision here is astounding. Do you really not realize that this administration isn't stopping at "just the illegals?" They have deported US citizens, children at that.
    - rantallion 1y ago
      Indeed. GP needs to read "First They Came".
      - immibis 1y ago
        The HN voting record shows that HN broadly agrees with GGP (your GP). It makes sense, since people here are big tech developers, who will never come into contact in police in this kind of way.
godelski 1y ago
IANAL Flashing your headlights to warn others of cops or anything else is generally considered free speech. IIRC, this has been ruled on several times in pretty high courts. So double check with a lawyer, but I'm like 99% confident there's nothing illegal about these types of Apps. I mean Waze has been doing it for years and even Google maps notifies you about speed traps. If some new ruling makes it not free speech, we're in danger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headlight_flashing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headlight_flashing
- account42 1y ago
  Flashing headlights gets people to drive more carefully and within the speed limit, thus you are not helping someone commit a crime. However if you help someone avoid being lawfully detained this might make you complicit in their actions and the courts could very well decide differently. Intent very much matters here.
  - haswell 1y ago
    Using this line of reasoning, let’s imagine for a moment that a car speeding 20mph over the limit sees someone on the other side of the road flashing their lights and slows down in time to avoid a ticket. Hasn’t the light flasher helped someone who was breaking the law avoid detection? And isn’t the intent of the flasher to ensure that people who were breaking the law have enough time to stop doing that long enough to avoid detection? > However if you help someone avoid being lawfully detained Obligatory “I am not a lawyer” disclaimer, but the people who make posts on this app have no contact with the people the app ostensibly benefits. If the app helped targets of ice find willing drivers in the area to help them escape to somewhere else, that’d be one thing since there is now a direct relationship with a person and the accused and direct action on the part of the app user. But I don’t see how this app is materially different from posting speed traps or DUI checkpoints on Waze, an action that has absolutely helped people avoid lawful intervention by police.
    - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
      The light flasher has merely persuaded someone to stop breaking the law. Whether or not the lights flashed, the police would not have been able to detect prior speeding, but merely detected speeding near them. An analogy might be to have a sign in a shop warning thieves of CCTV - the purpose is to prevent theft and is not considered to be helping someone avoid detection, although it does also do that.
zem 1y ago
the whole idea behind a police state is that legality doesn't matter when it conflicts with "the state wants to employ machinery to keep you in line"
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

by wslh 1y ago

idontwantthis 1y ago

Absolutely not illegal.

throw4565e3 1y ago

Since Waze still has their speed trap reporting feature, I’m guessing it’s still legal.

mrbombastic 1y ago
This is now built into google maps

Jtsummers 1y ago

Only if you knew by virtue of something like access to secret information (the things you'd have a security clearance to access). If you see the police are gathered around your local 7-Eleven, you're absolutely free to post it. If you know in advance that the police are going to be performing a raid on a meth house and you got that information by virtue of a security clearance (I assume they do have something of this sort like federal employees have, though I'm not sure the precise mechanisms) then you'd be violating the policies around that access. This could be illegal (just like a fed leaking secret or top secret information). If you know in advance because the police have loose lips, but you are not personally under any kind of confidentiality policy, you're free to post it. So the loose lipped cops at the bars I used to frequent could have caused real problems for themselves.

mingus88 1y ago

Worth pointing out that the question of legality is besides the point if you are purposefully antagonizing the police state. It’s not about legality. It’s about compliance. If you become a target, they will arrest you and drop charges later. They will make you miss work and lose your job. They will set up surveillance on you to catch you doing anything else they want to continue harassment. You don’t have to look hard to see reporting of officers using official databases to settle personal scores. 404 media just did a big expose on ALPR Flock DB abuses

danudey 1y ago
Honestly, they'll put you in an ICE detention facility indefinitely. They don't have to drop charges if they don't even have to charge you in the first place, and because they're all hiding behind masks there's no way for them to face any kind of repercussions. Beyond that, Trump has repeatedly floated the idea of sending "homegrowns" to overseas concentration camps, so it won't be long now before you don't have to do anything wrong to be targetted and you don't have any recourse regardless.
- defrost 1y ago
  Behold the June 11 Justice Dept Memo on wedge applications for "5. Prioritizing Denaturalization" https://www.justice.gov/civil/media/1404046/dl https://www.justice.gov/civil/media/1404046/dl with some discussion at: DOJ Opens Door To Stripping Citizenship Over Politics - https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/doj-opens-door-to-stripping-citizenship-over-politics https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/doj-opens-door-to-strippi... "We can't let those (accused) commies take over New York (even if elected)"
techdmn 1y ago
Crowd-sourced flock camera locations: https://deflock.me/ https://deflock.me/

dzhiurgis 1y ago

Waze in NZ removed this feature after threats from police. If you post to local social media groups about DUI checkpoints or mobile speed cameras you’ll be scolded by about 30% of people.

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
phatfish 1y ago
Pretty depressing it is only 30%.
- ghssds 1y ago
  Why?
  - jhy 1y ago
    Because folks don't want to enable drink-drivers and speeders? Maybe they want to use their roads with some basic level of safety?
    - WaxProlix 1y ago
      True, they should set up child abuse checkpoints too - think of the children after all.
      - HaZeust 1y ago
        And check that every single one of your federal papers are present and punctual. We'd hate to have someone that's unbecoming to share a full disclosure of themselves to officers on the road.
      - Izkata 1y ago
        Doctors and teachers handle that, since they have regular contract with children. At least in my state they're required by law to report suspected child abuse.

goku12 1y ago

While your question is meaningful and well intentioned, let me point out that it may be inconsequential. The legality of an action is moot when the regime ignores and defies the entire basis of those laws - the constitution. It's like trying to evaluate yourself against a standard that is no longer followed. Instead, evaluate yourself on the basis of your standing with the regime. If they dislike you for any reason including your skin color, they will find some sort of national security threat in your actions. Or they may punish you first and then claim the inability to correct it. On the other hand if they need you, they will completely ignore your actions, including even leaking of extremely sensitive information to unauthorized individuals.

account42 1y ago
[flagged]
- JeanMara 1y ago
  >Deporting people who are in the country illegally Oh? What about people who are permanent residents and are arbitrarily deemed "threat to national security" because of their opposition to Israel? What about the recent denaturalization DOJ unit that was just set up? Are those people "illegally" here too and that is constitutionally valid? The tunnel vision here is astounding. Do you really not realize that this administration isn't stopping at "just the illegals?" They have deported US citizens, children at that.
  - rantallion 1y ago
    Indeed. GP needs to read "First They Came".
    - immibis 1y ago
      The HN voting record shows that HN broadly agrees with GGP (your GP). It makes sense, since people here are big tech developers, who will never come into contact in police in this kind of way.

godelski 1y ago

IANAL Flashing your headlights to warn others of cops or anything else is generally considered free speech. IIRC, this has been ruled on several times in pretty high courts. So double check with a lawyer, but I'm like 99% confident there's nothing illegal about these types of Apps. I mean Waze has been doing it for years and even Google maps notifies you about speed traps. If some new ruling makes it not free speech, we're in danger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headlight_flashing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Headlight_flashing

account42 1y ago
Flashing headlights gets people to drive more carefully and within the speed limit, thus you are not helping someone commit a crime. However if you help someone avoid being lawfully detained this might make you complicit in their actions and the courts could very well decide differently. Intent very much matters here.
- haswell 1y ago
  Using this line of reasoning, let’s imagine for a moment that a car speeding 20mph over the limit sees someone on the other side of the road flashing their lights and slows down in time to avoid a ticket. Hasn’t the light flasher helped someone who was breaking the law avoid detection? And isn’t the intent of the flasher to ensure that people who were breaking the law have enough time to stop doing that long enough to avoid detection? > However if you help someone avoid being lawfully detained Obligatory “I am not a lawyer” disclaimer, but the people who make posts on this app have no contact with the people the app ostensibly benefits. If the app helped targets of ice find willing drivers in the area to help them escape to somewhere else, that’d be one thing since there is now a direct relationship with a person and the accused and direct action on the part of the app user. But I don’t see how this app is materially different from posting speed traps or DUI checkpoints on Waze, an action that has absolutely helped people avoid lawful intervention by police.
  - ndsipa_pomu 1y ago
    The light flasher has merely persuaded someone to stop breaking the law. Whether or not the lights flashed, the police would not have been able to detect prior speeding, but merely detected speeding near them. An analogy might be to have a sign in a shop warning thieves of CCTV - the purpose is to prevent theft and is not considered to be helping someone avoid detection, although it does also do that.

zem 1y ago

the whole idea behind a police state is that legality doesn't matter when it conflicts with "the state wants to employ machinery to keep you in line"

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]