Waze: Sherriffs push to have police tracking disabled in app

 

This may be of interest to Waze users.

Sheriffs want popular police-tracking app disabled
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sheriffs-want-popular-police-t...

Quote:

There are no known connections between any attack on police and Waze, but law enforcers such as Kopelev are concerned it's only a matter of time. They are seeking support among other law enforcement trade groups to pressure Google to disable the police-reporting function. The emerging policy debate places Google again at the center of an ongoing global debate about public safety, consumer rights and privacy.

Waze users mark police presence on maps without much distinction other than "visible" or "hidden." Users see a police icon, but it's not immediately clear whether police are there for a speed trap, a sobriety check or a lunch break. The police generally are operating in public spaces.

A Waze spokeswoman, Julie Mossler, said the company thinks deeply about safety and security. She said Waze works with the New York Police Department and others around the world by sharing information. Google declined to comment.

Page 1>>

oh boy

This will likely become another lightning rod topic like RLC and speed cameras.

Personally I'm neither for nor against this. All I can see is if WAZE agrees with law enforcement on law enforcement's request, another app will pop up to take over that application.

But what would I know?

--
Never argue with a pig. It makes you look foolish and it anoys the hell out of the pig!

no guarantee of privacy

bennor3814 wrote:

This may be of interest to Waze users.

Sheriffs want popular police-tracking app disabled
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sheriffs-want-popular-police-t...

Quote:

There are no known connections between any attack on police and Waze, but law enforcers such as Kopelev are concerned it's only a matter of time. They are seeking support among other law enforcement trade groups to pressure Google to disable the police-reporting function. The emerging policy debate places Google again at the center of an ongoing global debate about public safety, consumer rights and privacy.

Waze users mark police presence on maps without much distinction other than "visible" or "hidden." Users see a police icon, but it's not immediately clear whether police are there for a speed trap, a sobriety check or a lunch break. The police generally are operating in public spaces.

A Waze spokeswoman, Julie Mossler, said the company thinks deeply about safety and security. She said Waze works with the New York Police Department and others around the world by sharing information. Google declined to comment.

This strikes at the heart of the debate over privacy in there are no guarantees of privacy in regards to a vehicle on public roads or areas. It is troubling some LEOs are demanding they be protected but the private citizen has no guarantee they would be free from surveillance in the same situation. Hey guys, you can't have it both ways or we'll petition the courts to force you to have a warrant before you can open your eyes and observe any actions going around you because you may observe a law being broken.

--
ɐ‾nsǝɹ Just one click away from the end of the Internet

Improved Safety Knowing There Are LEO in the Area

Police presence improves safety. Knowing there are police, and seeing them on Waze, improves safety.

If it is true that simply having a law on the books will reduce detrimental behavior, actually having a police officer around and being able to know it will be even better.

Police have patrols just for that purpose, to be seen. Then they want to make sure they can not be observed, recorded, etc.

FYI, complaints against police have dropped dramatically with the prevalence of deployed photographic and video recording capability by the general public.

--
GPSMAP64s, iPhone 12, Yaesu VX-8R w/GPS.

Makes No Sense

Any cop parked in front of a donut shop is a potential target for a wacko. If they are so concerned about visibility, why don’t they use only unmarked vehicles and wear plain clothes?

It is their presence that promotes safety. Waze just increases that presence.

Consider this...

Suppose someone was planning on robbing a bank and they could see there was a police car next to the bank so they wait until it gets far away before committing the robbery.

The ability to observe the location of police for this reason might be enough to not reveal police locations.

--
Nuvi 2460LMT

you cant see me

every body wants to know what everybody else is doing, but nobody wants any body to see what their doing !! with the new rage of drones flying around privacy is a thing of the past email, phone conversations, just walking down the street in some city's and your on a camera, go to a Walmart or just about any gas station, bank, camera's are every wear!! the only privacy you have any more is in your bathroom (if you aren't married) so there is no sense worrying about it now its to late to stop it!!

Thank You

a_user wrote:
bennor3814 wrote:

This may be of interest to Waze users.

Sheriffs want popular police-tracking app disabled
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/sheriffs-want-popular-police-t...

Quote:

There are no known connections between any attack on police and Waze, but law enforcers such as Kopelev are concerned it's only a matter of time. They are seeking support among other law enforcement trade groups to pressure Google to disable the police-reporting function. The emerging policy debate places Google again at the center of an ongoing global debate about public safety, consumer rights and privacy.

Waze users mark police presence on maps without much distinction other than "visible" or "hidden." Users see a police icon, but it's not immediately clear whether police are there for a speed trap, a sobriety check or a lunch break. The police generally are operating in public spaces.

A Waze spokeswoman, Julie Mossler, said the company thinks deeply about safety and security. She said Waze works with the New York Police Department and others around the world by sharing information. Google declined to comment.

This strikes at the heart of the debate over privacy in there are no guarantees of privacy in regards to a vehicle on public roads or areas. It is troubling some LEOs are demanding they be protected but the private citizen has no guarantee they would be free from surveillance in the same situation. Hey guys, you can't have it both ways or we'll petition the courts to force you to have a warrant before you can open your eyes and observe any actions going around you because you may observe a law being broken.

and it's not a "tracking tool" since it's not picking up the exact position via GPS of the LEO as he moves around either. The LEO's car has to transmit by law it's position but Waze doesn't have access to that data. This is ridiculous.

--
Garmin: GPSIII / StreetPilot / StreetPilot Color Map / StreetPilot III / StreetPilot 2610 / GPSMAP 60CSx / Nuvi 770 / Nuvi 765T / Nuvi 3490LMT / Drivesmart 55 / GPSMAP 66st * Pioneer: AVIC-80 / N3 / X950BH

Unless this is truely real time..............

and it identifies the officer(s) I don't know that criminals are going to look at the app or website before doing the crime. If the data is even 30 to 60 minutes old the odds are the information is no longer valid or of any use.

Big brother

geo334 wrote:

every body wants to know what everybody else is doing, but nobody wants any body to see what their doing !! with the new rage of drones flying around privacy is a thing of the past email, phone conversations, just walking down the street in some city's and your on a camera, go to a Walmart or just about any gas station, bank, camera's are every wear!! the only privacy you have any more is in your bathroom (if you aren't married) so there is no sense worrying about it now its to late to stop it!!

Very true, see it on the local (Philadelphia, PA) news all the time. Bad guys gets caught, or at least seen, on one of the many cameras out there.

Makes me wonder just how far are we from the TV show "Person of Interest" being real.

--
. 2 Garmin DriveSmart 61 LMT-S, Nuvi 2689, 2 Nuvi 2460, Zumo 550, Zumo 450, Uniden R3 radar detector with GPS built in, includes RLC info. Uconnect 430N Garmin based, built into my Jeep. .

You took the word out of my mouth

I was wonder the same thing about the TV show "Person Of Interest"

Getting much

closer to 'Person of Interest'.

--
nuvi 1390 LT, nuvi 1450 LMT, Win 10

Why doesn't Uncle Sam just

Why doesn't Uncle Sam just put tape over our mouths so we have nothing to say! Once upon a time this country use to be great.

Creepy Uncle Sam

The U.S. Constitution isn't perfect. but it is better than what we have now.

???

Frovingslosh wrote:

The U.S. Constitution isn't perfect. but it is better than what we have now.

How does this comment apply to this thread?

What situations/things exist that are contrary to the Constitution?

Google might agree

but unless legislation is passed a new app will show up.

Google might respond to police pressure but an app from an entity with nothing to lose will ignore "polite" requests.

Motorists have traditionally found ways of warning other motorists about police presence. Flashing lights. CB radio. Waaze is more effective then the older ways.

No guarantee

a_user wrote:

It is troubling some LEOs are demanding they be protected but the private citizen has no guarantee they would be free from surveillance in the same situation.

Agreed. There is no privacy guarantee for anyone out in public. LEOs on speed patrol can (and in many cases do) change their parked patrol locations frequently such as after each motorist stop. Then they would appear to have a much greater presence on Waze than they actually have, as well as being hard to effectively be targeted. If someone is stupid or disturbed enough to target an LEO, he's certainly not dependent on Waze to do it. All kinds of other ways can be utilized such as phoning in a phony report or just observation.

--
JMoo On

Why....?

mmullins98 wrote:

Suppose someone was planning on robbing a bank and they could see there was a police car next to the bank so they wait until it gets far away before committing the robbery.

The ability to observe the location of police for this reason might be enough to not reveal police locations.

...was the police car at the bank? Happenstance?

Your scenario seems as likely as the people 'saved' from car accidents, because they were throne clear due to not wearing seatbelts.

I support the thin blue line but have no problem with this.

I favor.....

this functionality in Waze.

--
RKF (Bethesda, MD) Garmin Nuvi 660, 360 & Street Pilot

Unsure

I'm unsure how I feel about this but I can certainly see the viewpoint of LEO.

--
GPSMAP 76CSx - nüvi 760 - nüvi 200 - GPSMAP 78S

I think law..

I think law enforcement should worry about other things then gps tracking.

unmarked

bdhsfz6 wrote:

Any cop parked in front of a donut shop is a potential target for a wacko. If they are so concerned about visibility, why don’t they use only unmarked vehicles and wear plain clothes?

It is their presence that promotes safety. Waze just increases that presence.

That's like going back to the 90's when men got themselves a used Crown Vic, mounted some lights behind the grille, and just preyed upon unsuspecting victims (almost always female).

and then there is this

The Hill wrote:

DOJ spied on millions of cars to build real-time tracking database

http://thehill.com/policy/technology/230818-doj-building-sec...

And the police don't want their locations posted?

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Waze does not provide an

Waze does not provide an exact location. Even if it was able to post the exact coordinates provided, by the time users enter data, it is approximate at best.

Additionally, an alert of a police officer or a car on the side of the road is not inherently accurate. It depends on the time of the alert and if the vehicle moved since.

I do think that a "police alert" may cause drivers to be more cautious and slow down.

Imagine the opposite end of the police safety argument:

A police vehicle is on the side of the roadway or right lane, having pulled a vehicle over or responding to a disabled motorist. Drivers alerted by Waze that a police officer is nearby may be less likely to accidently strike the officer or the vehicle.

Drive safely!

Rob

--
Maps -> Wife -> Garmin 12XL -> StreetPilot 2610 -> Nuvi 660 (blown speaker) -> Nuvi 3790LMT

Waze could always change the

Waze could always change the Icon to the Hamburgler and folks would get the message.

--
Frank DriveSmart55 37.322760, -79.511267

either that or

phranc wrote:

Waze could always change the Icon to the Hamburgler and folks would get the message.

I was in a Homeland Security workshop a couple of years ago and one of the LEOs was joking about the stereotype of the officers being spotted hanging around the "Law Enforcement Power Ring" store, so they could use a doughnut as well.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

Boston

phranc wrote:

Waze could always change the Icon to the Hamburgler and folks would get the message.

Did the Hamburgler spend time in Scranton with clams?

French Crawler

Next they will petition Google to stop displaying all Dunking Doughnut locations.

--
Garmin 38 - Magellan Gold - Garmin Yellow eTrex - Nuvi 260 - Nuvi 2460LMT - Google Nexus 7 - Toyota Entune NAV

Stop?

flaco wrote:

Next they will petition Google to stop displaying all Dunking Doughnut locations.

They'll want them and Krispy Kreme displayed at double size!

They assume 2 things:
1) Every driver on earth uses Waze
2) Every driver with Waze running actually pays attention to it

Very thin assumptions

--
Striving to make the NYC Metro area project the best.

Follow the Money

Is the real reason a drop in speeding ticket revenue?

Just imagine the horror if Waze also had RLC and speed camera info. Come to think of it, why doesn't it? Or does it and I'm behind the curve?

Oh, You Are So Negative!

perpster wrote:

Is the real reason a drop in speeding ticket revenue?

Just imagine the horror if Waze also had RLC and speed camera info. Come to think of it, why doesn't it? Or does it and I'm behind the curve?

We all know that traffic laws and the pristine enforcement of such are only in the interest of safety. Revenue has nothing to do with it.

[major sarcasm]

--
GPSMAP64s, iPhone 12, Yaesu VX-8R w/GPS.

Well,

perpster wrote:

Is the real reason a drop in speeding ticket revenue?

Just imagine the horror if Waze also had RLC and speed camera info. Come to think of it, why doesn't it? Or does it and I'm behind the curve?

It does.

--
If you don't know where you are going, you might wind up someplace else. - Yogi Berra

Heard of Waze Yesterday

Heard about this app yesterday and I now use it.

This is the Age-old question in a different form.

--Its OK for government to have guns but not citizens.
--OK for police to film you, but a citizen filming a cop gets arrested or his camera broken.
--OK for a cop or even a machine to verify your speed with radar, but not ok for you to have a radar detector.
--OK for a cop to speed down the highway but not for you.
--OK for a cop not to wear a seatbelt, but not you.
--OK for police to lie to you in the name of "investigation" but illegal for you to lie to the authorities.
--OK for police to scan and track your license plate but you can't tell anyone where a cop eats his donuts.

We are supposed to be equal, but some are more equal than others.

But Hey! If you are not doing anything wrong, it shouldn't matter, right? (if the dripping sarcasm has stained your shirt I"m very sorry)

like

grtlake wrote:

Heard about this app yesterday and I now use it.

This is the Age-old question in a different form.

--Its OK for government to have guns but not citizens.
--OK for police to film you, but a citizen filming a cop gets arrested or his camera broken.
--OK for a cop or even a machine to verify your speed with radar, but not ok for you to have a radar detector.
--OK for a cop to speed down the highway but not for you.
--OK for a cop not to wear a seatbelt, but not you.
--OK for police to lie to you in the name of "investigation" but illegal for you to lie to the authorities.
--OK for police to scan and track your license plate but you can't tell anyone where a cop eats his donuts.

We are supposed to be equal, but some are more equal than others.

But Hey! If you are not doing anything wrong, it shouldn't matter, right? (if the dripping sarcasm has stained your shirt I"m very sorry)

going to Vegas, the house has the advantage

poor poor cops

Too bad Google isn't likely to disable this function.

Cops got radar, we got radar detectors.
Cops complained got laws to outlaw radar detectors.

Now we have WAZE to find speed traps.
Lets see em' outlaw WAZE

--
Never argue with a pig. It makes you look foolish and it anoys the hell out of the pig!

Your facts are not correct

grtlake wrote:

...
--Its OK for government to have guns but not citizens.

Don't quite know how to respond to this since is is so ludicrous

Quote:

--OK for police to film you, but a citizen filming a cop gets arrested or his camera broken.

There are many municipalities that actually take pains to remind LEOs that citizens have a right to film them. Regardless you have the right to film police so long as you are not interfering with their work.

While you may be harassed for doing so - courts have affirmed the right to do so.

Quote:

--OK for a cop or even a machine to verify your speed with radar, but not ok for you to have a radar detector.
...

My feeling is that the vast majority of jurisdictions allow radar detectors.

I understand that you did this post in order to drip sarcasm, but it would have been more effective if you facts were correct.

Hoping that this does not

Hoping that this does not happen

F.U.D.

TroyVFuchs wrote:

Hoping that this does not happen

FUD, or Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. The recently appointed interim head of the National Sheriff's Association is behind this push and I seriously doubt he obtained a consensus of all their members before jumping off the end of a 30 meter diving board into an almost empty pool.

As one Law Professor (who probably never practiced law) stated this call for a ban has about as much hope of being enacted or approved as a ban on kitchen knives because someone misused one and killed someone else. There is no proof the app was used for the purpose claimed and a great many law enforcement officers don't mind in the least as it actually has a calming effect.

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

S.F.T.D.

Every cop is a criminal.
And all the sinners saints. grin

geeeeezzzzzz

ericruby wrote:

Every cop is a criminal.
And all the sinners saints. grin

At least get it right...

Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints

shock

--
Never argue with a pig. It makes you look foolish and it anoys the hell out of the pig!

LEO

LEO's hiding places and in plain site post up's,
have been given away since the very early days of flashing head lights to on coming traffic and CB radio with both still used today.
Whats the big deal, other than control?

--
Using Android Based GPS.The above post and my sig reflects my own opinions, expressed for the purpose of informing or inspiring, not commanding. Naturally, you are free to reject or embrace whatever you read.

Flashing headlights

BobDee wrote:

LEO's hiding places and in plain site post up's,
have been given away since the very early days of flashing head lights to on coming traffic and CB radio with both still used today.
Whats the big deal, other than control?

Quite true, which reminds me, flashing headlights to oncoming motorists to warn of LEOs/patrol cars running speed enforcement has also been or at least used to be against the law in some jurisdictions, with tickets being fought on free speech grounds.

Life is a Tom and Jerry cartoon. Us vs. them, we get in some licks, they get in some licks.

--
JMoo On

it's like

Driving down the road eating a burger... razz

--
Never argue with a pig. It makes you look foolish and it anoys the hell out of the pig!

Stretched for effect, but not much.

jgermann wrote:
grtlake wrote:

...

Don't quite know how to respond to this since is is so ludicrous
It would have been more effective if you facts were correct.

I suppose I did take a little bit of literary license with some examples to illustrate the double standard when it comes to what the Ruling Class is allowed to do but the ordinary citizen is not.

-I should have specified the citizen can own some guns but not others, and he might be limited in the number of bullets (s)he can put in the magazine.

-If a cop arrests and intimidates and harasses you if you are filming him, and you need to go to court to have your rights affirmed, you were and are denied that right.

-Many states (almost half) make it illegal for commercial vehicles to have radar detectors. NY it is illegal for certain vehicles commercial or not, OK has a strange DOT law about them, VA outlaws them all.

My basic point is government will always, always, always try to expand its control over the citizen.
I believe these rights are not to given away or allowed to be taken; we are obliged to protect them.
Geez, it took the Supreme Court to tell cops I can blink my headlights!

CB Radio

A CB radio has been the ultimate detector for decades. Just get a scanner and listen to it. Nobody trying to outlaw that. If that can exist, then flashing headlights, laser/radar detectors, are all similar and nobody should have a problem any of them.

Well, unless some feel their narcissistic control is being threatened.

--
GPSMAP64s, iPhone 12, Yaesu VX-8R w/GPS.

maybe not but ....

diesel wrote:

A CB radio has been the ultimate detector for decades. Just get a scanner and listen to it. Nobody trying to outlaw that. If that can exist, then flashing headlights, laser/radar detectors, are all similar and nobody should have a problem any of them.

Well, unless some feel their narcissistic control is being threatened.

It seems more and more PDs are going to encryption for their broadcasts, and some others are using systems that current scanners can not monitor.

--
. 2 Garmin DriveSmart 61 LMT-S, Nuvi 2689, 2 Nuvi 2460, Zumo 550, Zumo 450, Uniden R3 radar detector with GPS built in, includes RLC info. Uconnect 430N Garmin based, built into my Jeep. .

CB Still Works

A CB can still be used to broadcast sightings, as truckers do all the time. And a simple scanner can listen in on the CB band.

Don't need to listen in on the police.

soberbyker wrote:
diesel wrote:

A CB radio has been the ultimate detector for decades. Just get a scanner and listen to it. Nobody trying to outlaw that. If that can exist, then flashing headlights, laser/radar detectors, are all similar and nobody should have a problem any of them.

Well, unless some feel their narcissistic control is being threatened.

It seems more and more PDs are going to encryption for their broadcasts, and some others are using systems that current scanners can not monitor.

--
GPSMAP64s, iPhone 12, Yaesu VX-8R w/GPS.

not as popular anymore ...

diesel wrote:

A CB can still be used to broadcast sightings, as truckers do all the time. And a simple scanner can listen in on the CB band.

Don't need to listen in on the police.

soberbyker wrote:
diesel wrote:

A CB radio has been the ultimate detector for decades. Just get a scanner and listen to it. Nobody trying to outlaw that. If that can exist, then flashing headlights, laser/radar detectors, are all similar and nobody should have a problem any of them.

Well, unless some feel their narcissistic control is being threatened.

It seems more and more PDs are going to encryption for their broadcasts, and some others are using systems that current scanners can not monitor.

Your first post wasn't clear, now I see you are saying listen to the CB frequencies on the scanner. Costwise you might as well just get a real CB, although CB isn't as popular as it used to be. I drive a truck for a living and I hear a lot of chit chat but not much in the way of 'smokey reports" anymore, at least not here in the Philadelphia area.

--
. 2 Garmin DriveSmart 61 LMT-S, Nuvi 2689, 2 Nuvi 2460, Zumo 550, Zumo 450, Uniden R3 radar detector with GPS built in, includes RLC info. Uconnect 430N Garmin based, built into my Jeep. .

Waze again?

soberbyker wrote:

I drive a truck for a living and I hear a lot of chit chat but not much in the way of 'smokey reports" anymore, at least not here in the Philadelphia area.

Perhaps it's because they're using Waze. laugh out loud

--
Live every day like it's your last. Some day you'll be right - Benny Hill

Cell phones

soberbyker wrote:
diesel wrote:

A CB radio has been the ultimate detector for decades. Just get a scanner and listen to it. Nobody trying to outlaw that. If that can exist, then flashing headlights, laser/radar detectors, are all similar and nobody should have a problem any of them.

Well, unless some feel their narcissistic control is being threatened.

It seems more and more PDs are going to encryption for their broadcasts, and some others are using systems that current scanners can not monitor.

In my area, it seems that the local PD use their cell phones a lot. On some scanners for cell phones, you only hear the dispatchers conversation. And looking at the CHP cars, there must be 10 different antennas on their roof.

--
nuvi 1390 LT, nuvi 1450 LMT, Win 10

NO

jbees60 wrote:

In my area, it seems that the local PD use their cell phones a lot. On some scanners for cell phones, you only hear the dispatchers conversation. And looking at the CHP cars, there must be 10 different antennas on their roof.

There is no such thing as scanners for cell phones, at least not in the USA. Even before cell phones went all digital, the analog frequencies that cell phones used were legally banned by Congress from being available on any consumer scanner. (It was claimed to be a privacy issue and was promoted by the cell industry because it was a lot cheaper to buy some politicians than to secure their communications properly). You could still use some scanners to pick up some cordless telephone transmissions (and indeed you usually got only one side of that transmission, as each end used a different transmit frequency, although there could often be enough returning audio to hear both sides).

With the switch in this country to all digital cell phone transmission (that happened quite a while ago, ten years or more), even if you have a radio that had been built before the cell phone ban or a radio that was modified to receive "out of band", you now can't listen in on cell phones at all, as you have no way to convert the digital data being sent back into audio.

There have been a lot of changes in police radios in the last 20 years or so two, but the law has not prohibited intercepting these signals, so newer scanner technologies try to keep pace with them. One big change is "trunking" or "frequency hopping" systems. Older scanners can't listen in to these, but it is still legal for the manufacturers to try to figure out what the LEOs are up to and listen in and many modern scanners do.

When listening to non-cell phone police traffic, the police officer may be a lot farther from you than the dispatcher and is certainly working with a much smaller antenna (think a patrol car mounted half wave or even a rubber duck handheld as opposed to a large antenna mounted at a high antenna tower or on a high building). So it is not unreasonable that you would hear the dispatcher and not the cop in the field, depending on your location. But this is certainly not a case of "scanners for cell phones".

Ironically, while you can't listen in to cell phone traffic for supposed privacy reasons, the cops are increasingly using technology that allows them to do that on a massive scale (Research "Stingray" for one example). And they have passed laws that force the communication companies to add hardware to give the government easier automatic assess to tap even your land line. But by law that equipment is limited for sale to only the government. So there are no scanner that listen to cell phones.

If you believe differently then please post what make and model scanner you believe that you can do this with, and confirm that "your area" is in the United States.

One other thing worth mentioning: To listen to a modern frequency hopping trunked system, there is an alternative to going out and spending many hundreds of dollars for a new scanner after you find that your old scanner can no longer receive the broadcasts. That is that people who do intercept these signals are making them available over the Internet. You can listen in on them with a PC and an Internet connection, or even an Android app (and I assume there are similar apps for Apple fanboys as well).

Page 1>>