They Can Run, But Cannot Hide

[GregS]

Google Waze traffic app draws ire of U.S. sheriffs

Smartphone app interferes with law enforcement, sheriffs' association contends

By Eileen Sullivan, The Associated Press Posted: Jan 29, 2015 1:20 PM ET Last Updated: Jan 29, 2015 2:00 PM ET

Google's Waze is a crowd-sourced mapping and navigation app that allows drivers to share traffic information and updates maps in real time. However, U.S. sheriffs say the app puts lives at danger. (Nir Elias /Reuters)

133 shares

 

Facebook

 

 

Twitter

 

 

Reddit

 

 

Google

 

 

Share

 

 

Email

 

Related Stories

• Google buys Waze mapping app
• Google Maps getting an overhaul
• New Apple iPhone 5 maps app frustrates users

Not only does a feature of a popular Google Inc. mobile app put police officers' lives in danger, it also interferes with law enforcement's ability to carry out its speeding ticket mission, a leading group of sheriffs said this week.

The National Sheriffs' Association had previously focused its campaign against Waze on police safety after the fatal shootings of two New York police officers in December.

Waze is a user-sourced traffic and navigation app, but it also allows users to tag the locations of parked police vehicles, accidents, congestion, traffic cameras, potholes and more, so that other drivers using the app are warned as they approach the same location.

• Google buys Waze mapping app
• New Apple iPhone 5 maps app frustrates users
• Google Maps getting an overhaul

The ability to mark police vehicle locations, however, is a problem for the sheriffs' association.

The group broadened a campaign against Waze with a new statement criticizing Google's software as hampering the use of speed traps. The trade association said radar guns and other speed enforcement techniques have reduced highways deaths.

"This app will hamper those activities by locating law enforcement officers and puts the public at risk," the group said.

In a twist, the newly expressed concern about speeding is also Google's own defence of its software.

Popularity spiked after law enforcement concerns

"Most users tend to drive more carefully when they believe law enforcement is nearby," Waze spokeswoman Julie Mossler said.

Waze actually gained popularity in the last week since The Associated Press first disclosed law enforcement's concerns, climbing four positions to No. 8 on Apple's ranking of the top free mobile apps.

'Waze represents person-to person information in the public square. And that's long been a U.S. right under the Constitution.'- Nuala O'Connor, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology

The Los Angeles Police chief and the executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police have echoed the sheriffs' concerns about police safety but have not said anything about the app interfering with catching speeders.

Sen. Charles Schumer, a Democrat, who in 2011 raised issues with mobile apps that identified drunken driving checkpoints, is concerned about the Waze app police-reporting feature, according to his office.

Other major police trade groups had not yet formally joined the sheriffs' campaign. Some police departments near San Francisco, where Google is headquartered, did not share the same concerns.

Heather Randol, a spokeswoman for the San Jose Police Department, said the department does not have much information about the software's impact.

"However, part of our police model includes a highly visible police presence to reduce crime," Randol said.

Police icons show up on maps

Waze users mark locations of police vehicles — which are generally stopped in public spaces — on maps without much distinction other than "visible" or "hidden." Users driving nearby 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.

Police objections to Waze add new complexity to the debate about technology and privacy. Some Waze supporters lashed out at outspoken sheriffs on social media, pointing to the irony of police concerns about being watched amid sensational disclosures about police and government surveillance of citizens.

Sheriff Mike Brown of Bedford County, Virginia, said states might pass laws to prevent people from revealing the locations of parked police cruisers. Privacy advocates, however, said First Amendment protections will stand in the way.

"Waze represents person-to person information in the public square," said Nuala O'Connor, head of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a Washington civil liberties group, who said she uses the software. "And that's long been a U.S. right under the Constitution."

There are no known connections between any violent attack on police and the Waze software. But Brown and others believe it is only a matter of time.

© The Associated Press, 2015

[phaquetoo]

im going to go find that app,

 

Thanks Greg

 

Peace

[GregS]

My traffic fines just went down.

[Wild Bill]

Pleasant Ridge used to park an empty car under the 696 overpass on Woodward. When drivers saw it they would immediately slow down. If these pea brains were thinking they could post false locations themselves so people would think there's a car there. It would save manpower so they could do more important things, like sleeping in their cars and eating donuts.

[AbominableDro-Man]

"If these pea brains were thinking they could post false locations themselves so people would think there's a car there"

 

Wouldn't post that out loud Bill, never know when one of the more competent desk pilots' is at their duty, they might get an idea!   

Edited January 30, 2015 by AbominableDro-Man

[outsideinthecold]

Saw the sheriff's lament about Waze last month. Figured any app that raised their blood pressure should be on my phone.

 

Haven't used it often. The app is not widely used (yet) so relying solely on it has some risk.

 

It does raise the question why we still have police out patrolling roads when cameras have become so ubiquitous and capable.

 

Simply installing photo radar cameras on I-94 for instance and not only would nobody speed, everyone would be safer.

 

Safer without police patrolling the roads?

 

Yep. Safer. Think about the typical driver's reaction when they see a police car. Instant distraction. Universally elevated risk.

 

Now consider a world without patrolling police giving out random speeding tickets to unwary speeders and cameras instead. Old OITC is a slow learner but one or two camera generated speeding tickets and even he would slow down. So would every other driver.

 

So the oblivious conclusion is the rule makers actually want driver's to speed so more cops can drive around and make everyone else less safe.

 

Weird world this one we found ourselves in.

[bobandtorey]

Leo is after more then writing speeding tickets imo

[MrShpongle]

The sheriffs don't give a chit about traffic safety.  They're concerned about losing an easy source of revenue.  Same reason they like to bust marijuana users vs. going after meth labs or crack houses - they like soft targets.

Edited January 30, 2015 by MrShpongle

[garyfisher]

Photo radar would be super simple to beat in court.  Just because someone sped in your car doesn't mean you did it.  The burden of proof is on them; they are just hoping for simple compliance and citizens sending them a pay check. 

 

http://www.copblock.org/33390/how-to-beat-a-photo-enforced-speeding-ticket-or-red-light-ticket/

 

 

Edited January 30, 2015 by garyfisher

[trichcycler]

don't forget to turn off your gps after using the app.

[GregS]

Saw the sheriff's lament about Waze last month. Figured any app that raised their blood pressure should be on my phone.

 

Haven't used it often. The app is not widely used (yet) so relying solely on it has some risk.

 

It does raise the question why we still have police out patrolling roads when cameras have become so ubiquitous and capable.

 

Simply installing photo radar cameras on I-94 for instance and not only would nobody speed, everyone would be safer.

 

Safer without police patrolling the roads?

 

Yep. Safer. Think about the typical driver's reaction when they see a police car. Instant distraction. Universally elevated risk.

 

Now consider a world without patrolling police giving out random speeding tickets to unwary speeders and cameras instead. Old OITC is a slow learner but one or two camera generated speeding tickets and even he would slow down. So would every other driver.

 

So the oblivious conclusion is the rule makers actually want driver's to speed so more cops can drive around and make everyone else less safe.

 

Weird world this one we found ourselves in.

Do you mean to say like things were more than 25 years ago?? I remember being told to take my friends, or myself, home, and be careful. OKAY officer.

 

"If these pea brains were thinking they could post false locations themselves so people would think there's a car there. It would save manpower so they could do more important things, like sleeping in their cars and eating donuts."

 

My traffic fines still go down.

[Indigro]

From what iv read, they r concerned about possible ambush style cop killings??? Hyperbole... just discredits them even more.

 

Guess they should also go underground w their main office as well... you know, in case the terminator comes to life & targets them while searching out sarah connor. Definitely should also ban phone directories as well. Its a real threat if u think about it.

[Kingdiamond]

The only thing they are truly concerned with is the lost revenue from speeders slowing down heading into local speed traps I drive through the worst speed trap city in the country (Livonia) daily so I need to find this app as well.