265
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 89 points 7 months ago

SURELY these cops can be totally trusted to not use this when they see an attractive woman they want to follow around, or a vulnerable minority they want to harass.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 37 points 7 months ago

I mean, the Japanese police has been doing this for decades with paintball guns. Definitely better than high speed chases.

[-] realbadat@programming.dev 41 points 7 months ago

Oh 100% it's better than high speed chases.

And given the history of basically every police force throughout the United States, guaranteed to be misused and abused as well.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub -1 points 7 months ago

Yeah, police are already abusing GPS trackers. The thing is that banning technology isn't going to fix that, it's a government that will hold police accountable for their crimes.

[-] realbadat@programming.dev 4 points 7 months ago

I don't believe anyone said anything about banning anything.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

I mean... their comment was specifically NOT about the normal intended use.

[-] jonne@infosec.pub 8 points 7 months ago

That's a policy problem, not a technology problem. Cops are abusing every tool they're given because they can get away with it, not because of the tool. If you sent them on patrol unarmed and on foot they'd still be going around beating up people with the current oversight regime.

[-] realbadat@programming.dev 9 points 7 months ago

That's the reaction here though.

Not the technology, the lack of oversight. I didn't see any mention of an oversight board or review panel, repercussions for abuse, etc.

Which with any technology, and the clear history of exactly the issues you've noted, is an absolute requirement imo.

Great tech and approach. Guaranteed to be used correctly in some cases, and massively abused in others. Without policy revisions to address those abuses, it's a potentially very frightening technology in police hands.

[-] MotoAsh@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

"... because they can get away with it."

Sounds like it doesn't matter what tech we give them so long as they can get away with it.

[-] Daxtron2@startrek.website 21 points 7 months ago

Silent, small, and easily hideable gps trackers already exist that would make much more sense to use than this.

[-] Ajen@sh.itjust.works 14 points 7 months ago

This seems harder to abuse than the regular GPS trackers they've had for a long time. The dart probably makes a loud noise when it hits the car and might damage the paint. If they're harassing someone wouldn't they rather quietly stick a tracker to the bottom of a car where it wouldn't be noticed?

[-] bitfucker@programming.dev 9 points 7 months ago

Abuse of technology is not the fault of the technology itself. You didn't blame the gun for misuse of guns by the police do you? IMHO, this tech is better than the government having EVERY car GPS tracked

[-] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 11 points 7 months ago

You don't blame the tool, you blame either the individual or the policies. Unfortunately, in US police, the individuals tend to be the failed marine dictator wannabees, who the thanks to lacks policies get a near carte blanche to abuse those tools like there is no tomorrow.

Same goes for gun policies in general, they're so dumb that you have near daily mass shootings there, causing loads of individuals to wonder how this can possibly happen and claim that there is nothing anyone safe god himself can do about the situation.

[-] PriorityMotif@lemmy.world 4 points 7 months ago

It illegal to track someone like that without a warrant. Instead, they can use the easily accessible legal privately owned ALPR system to see their habits.

[-] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

I don't think legality is a concern of someone planning on stalking or harassment

[-] Kusimulkku@lemm.ee 3 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Uhhh it does sound a bit far fetched to think they'll start shooting these darts at random people? I don't think it's a very discreet process. Something that could happen but I don't foresee this becoming a common thing

this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2024
265 points (98.9% liked)

Futurology

1813 readers
36 users here now

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS