This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
In a just world, the officer, the police department, and Flock would all owe her compensation. I'd put the amount at about 10x the fine for the offense.
The problem is that any fees cops get for doing stuff coming out of tax money.
In a way I understand why, but it just bullshit at the end of day.
A proposal I've seen floated a few times is to require police to carry liability insurance individually and give them a stipend for an average/reasonable amount. This is usually paired with changes to qualified immunity to make lawsuits and insurance claims easier.
The idea is that risky behavior from police costs them money personally.
Break it down; ~~2% cop 5% department 25% flock~~ 2x cop 5x department 25x flock
The extra 20 from flock goes back to taxpayers who had to pay the department's portion.
That adds up to 30%. Maybe you meant 25/50/25.
I'd have to know more before breaking it down. If Flock told police departments that these alerts are up to date and reliable, I might assign them up to half the blame. If there were clear that the information could be a few days old, then I'd set it smaller, but not to zero because I think offering an "alert" product to law enforcement for minor administrative offenses based on stale data is irresponsible.
Similarly for the department and the officer, I have to ask whether there's a policy about how to handle this sort of thing. If there's a bad policy, the department gets most of the blame. If the officer decided to ignore a valid insurance card and trust a third-party database, the the officer gets most of the blame.
I’m struggling to process how the fuck that cop could still write a ticket after seeing a valid proof of insurance. The sheer arrogance is ridiculous
There's an infamous video of a cop who tickets an amputee for holding a cellphone in her non existent hand. He triples down in the video that she had the phone specifically in her missing hand WHILE she is holding up the stump and laughing at him. She of course disputed it, agency stupidly stood by their braindead officer until it got to court when suddenly the cop begged for the entire thing to be dropped, after proceedings had started, wasting everyone's time and taxpayer dollars.
They are so used to never being questioned, and having zero consequences when they are because of qualified immunity, that their brains are incapable of processing that they are fucking up something incredibly simple.
after proceedings had started, wasting everyone's time and taxpayer dollars.
That was the point - that is, that's why the cop didn't just walk away. He knew he was wrong, but she embarrassed him. He knew that he could just force the issue right up to the last minute, and there would be no consequences for him. Major hassle and inconvenience for her, but he still gets paid and there's almost certainly no negative repercussions for him.
He was deliberately making life more difficult for her, because his feelings were hurt. It wasn't out of ignorance, it was out of childish malice.
Plus there is probably some percentage of people who will just pay a fine rather than losing time at work to go to trial. That may have been what he was hoping for.
We're pretty close to the anniversary of the events that ended up in the creation of the "qualified immunity" doctrine which was September 13, 1961. The case involves the civil rights movement, 15 priests, Mississippi, and law enforcement overreach. It's a good read.
Seen one where the cop decided a Blind man's white cane was a weapon as well. There's probably even worse going on that doesn't make the Internet.
Apparently they can write tickets for things that are objectively false. There's bodycam footage of cop giving a ticket to a woman a few months ago for using her phone while driving. He said "with your right hand" before she showed him that she doesn't have a right hand. Gave her a ticket anyway
That chick was the perfect level of petty! Video cracks me up every time.
"Soo.... We just gonna call it here, or...?"
I've seen other examples of this in bodycam videos from Georgia on YouTube where Flock wasn't involved at all. The cops claimed that they only go by what their computers say regardless of whether the person has proof of insurance on hand. In one notable example, a cop stopped an elderly couple at around midnight for the same reason, ignored their proof of insurance, and left them stranded on the side of the road after towing their car. The husband was disabled and couldn't walk.
It's not just Georgia
It's that thing where your brain locks in on your first understanding of a situation and it's harder to change after that point. Cops, being morons, are extra susceptible to it.
The trust they have in it is the scariest part. It gives flock enormous power.
That's a funny way of spelling "sheer ignorance"
Was she black?
Edit: yup, she was black. I hope the officer suddenly runs out of blood soon.
that was my first question seeing the headline. shame on flock and the officer
So I had a suspicion, and yup, this was another ticket for DWB. Flock was just the excuse du jour.
It certainly sounds "more legitimate" than pulling them over for a failure to use a blinker or doing too sharp of a left turn, as friends and victims of DWB can attest to having happened to them.
Although given the paper trail here, it is probably easier to fight in court.
What's crazy to me is how this insurance database lookup even makes sense... Most insurance companies give you a grace period to add new vehicles if you have an existing policy. For mine in Washington, I have 14 days to tell my insurance if I've bought a new car, and it's covered under my existing policy until then. Flock would have no way of looking up this information and has no justification to flag a vehicle like this...
Bold of you to assume cops use logic
What's crazy to me is that someone, somewhere thought big brother was necessary for enforcing car insurance at all.
Honestly she should sue for malicious prosecution. She was driving the vehicle legally with insurance, she proved that to the officer by showing her paperwork, and then, knowing that she had insurance and the complaint was baseless, the officer wrote the ticket anyway.
This should be an open and shut case.
The police officer did the right thing. As we all know, computers are always right /s
They have to. If they start admitted it's making mistakes, there might be a push to take them down. And then we're be sooooo insecure. Even though it doesn't seem like the cameras are being used to actually fight crime.
Even though it doesn’t seem like the cameras are being used to actually fight crime.
Just in the last week I noticed a huge uptick in news articles about crimes being solved "with the help of" Flock systems. They're trying too little, too late to drive the narrative.
Facebook is being flooded, thers a cat in the hat dude locally that is copying the clown trend from a decade ago, every braindead person on there is saying see this is why we need flock cameras and trying to jusitfy more.
If the cameras are sending cops after non-existent crimes, how are they helping with efficiency or cost?
People pay fake tickets because it's too expensive to fight them.
ACAB as usual.
I hate nothing more than people blindly following what an algorithm tells them. What's the point of paying this idiot cop if they're dumber than an outdated database?
Look, I'm not saying that I support these Big Brother-type companies, but if the cop is just gonna follow the instructions on their computer and not even think for themselves, then we should cut out the middleman. Flock should send tickets directly to offenders. You're far less likely to get shot that way.
<s>
What recourse could an AI company possibly have over someone? Negative social credits.
Run a stop sign? Social credit goes down. Rob a Walmart? Social credit goes down. Murder someone? Social credit goes down, but more. Safely follow all road laws? Fuck you, this counter only goes down. Have low social credit? Believe it or not, social credit goes down.
How do we use these social credits to keep society in line? Public registry. Look up why anyone has their social credit score. Filter by thefts at Walmart and buy those people beers.
</s>
But seriously. If the Justice system is willing to automate and outsource police work, then get those fucking cops off the streets.
You're far less likely to get shot that way
Well... Until they start putting guns in the cameras anyway.
Too bad there's not malpractice but for cops
There is, kinda. It's called the "Brady List" and kinda almost can do the same thing.
oh cool, so now we have a private company directing our police force.
And the relationship is both symbiotic and exponential. The police make money writing tickets, that money goes to the local govenment, and that government can buy more flock cameras. More flock cameras, more tickets, more money, more flock cameras.....
Cyberpunk distophia here we come!
Also its a DWB, but with flock... Nice.
At least the upcoming lawsuit should pay for college.
being black was absolutely the real crime the cop was concerned with, the insurance bullshit was just manufactured cause.
To continue, please select all the squares that contain a gun:
black men holding wallets
Well we know cops are dumb and lazy as a group... imagine once you give them license to turn off the remaining brain power as AI is thinking for them, what could go wrong?
If the cameras are sending cops after non-existent crimes, how are they helping with efficiency or cost?
