This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
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 What's the point of paying this idiot cop if they're dumber than an outdated database?
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.
Figures. I had the assumption the moment I read this happened in Georgia.
To continue, please select all the squares that contain a gun:
black men holding wallets
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.
So the system doesn't use the official database but some copy of it that is low to be updated. Surely this would happen every single day if this is how it works.
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.
Seems to not do it most of the time
Yeah, it doesn't have a lot of teeth. You can use it to get testimony thrown out though.
Do they refer to those on that list as the Brady Bunch?
They should...
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
People named Renee better join the revolution now.
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.
It should come out of their operating budget.
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.
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
Hope this diagram of cop programming helps:
copGPT thinking...
1 [BE A BASTARD?]
2 / \
3 / \
4 NO [YES]-------[BEAT WIFE?]
5 / \
6 / \
7 NO [YES] [return to line 1]
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.
We need to have laws where if cases are dismissed or dropped the citing/arresting officer facing penalties.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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...?"
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...
What's crazy to me is that someone, somewhere thought big brother was necessary for enforcing car insurance at all.
Bold of you to assume cops use logic
ACAB as usual.
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.
Actually, a number of governments have contracted with private companies to handle certain policing duties like tolls or parking enforcement. Those companies then basically get all the rights of the government. I believe that it was NY City that was having a serious problem with parking enforcement stealing (impounding vehicles) and putting tickets on legally parked vehicles (about 10yrs ago) just to bump their profits.
Also just hand the guns to the AI as well.
That sounds like a feature outside of the agreed set. As a compromise, the UI can have access to the device speaker and its LLM can shout "BANG" at random intervals.
EXTERMINATE EXTERMINATE
So I had a suspicion, and yup, this was another ticket for DWB. Flock was just the excuse du jour.
The police officer did the right thing. As we all know, computers are always right /s