all 17 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 13 points 4 hours ago*

When I worked for a healthcare software company one of my roles was technical support on a controlled substance monitoring program on a state-by-state basis.

Cops had a separate login portal, and had to go through quite a process to get their account. Once they did, they could submit a search, but had to justify it with a reason that included the warrant number. And even then, it required secondary approval of the search request by a state-level employee.

Why the fuck is that not the minimum for searching someone's whereabouts?

(To add, I think such programs are unethical when available to cops. For doctors, it was used to make sure a patient wasn't doc-shopping for opiates, and even then I'm hesitant. It has a potential to save lives via intervention upon finding someone's 'shopping, but I don't think it's usually used as a safe intervention.)

  • source
  • [–] 21 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

    It doesn't surprise me at all. Who knew the maniacs who frequently abuse their power would abuse their power?

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 5 hours ago (1 child)

    It's just demonstrating that the "reason for search" field for accountability actually has zero accountability. This should be tied to the identity of the person filling the field and mockery of procedure should be grounds for demotion and/or loss of access, but we know that neither is the actual way things run.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 4 hours ago

    It's because of dilution of responsibility.

    Private companies aren't restricted by the Constitution, so they're not on the hook. Police are just using a private service, so the department isn't on the hook either

    So really, it's no one's responsibility to make sure this isn't abused. That's what we have to fix

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 11 hours ago (7 children)

    Cops are usually one of two things.

    1. bullied future stalker

    2. (rarely) defending us from bullied future stalker

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 10 hours ago (6 children)

    The later is possible, and I’d bet many try to get into policing because of that ideal, but I hear they tend to get bullied out of the profession by the former, or else converted by them.

    As the saying goes, one bad apple spoils the bunch.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 10 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) (5 children)
  • [–] 5 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

    psst, delete everything after the ? in your link

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

    The thumbnail reminds me of Patapon.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 8 hours ago (1 child)

    Thought this thumbnail was Welcome to Nightvale for a moment

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment