or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple looking into senate request for DUI checkpoint app removals
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Apple looking into senate request for DUI checkpoint app removals

post #1 of 58
Thread Starter 
During a U.S. Senate subcommittee hearing on Tuesday, Apple Vice President of Software Technology Guy L. "Bud" Tribble told senators that the company is in the process of "looking into" the legality of apps that broadcast police DUI checkpoints.

Four U.S. Senators, including Sen. Charles Schumer, sent letters to Apple, Google and Research in Motion in March requesting that the companies remove apps notifying users of police sobriety checkpoints their respective application stores. Schumer raised the issue again at Tuesday's Senate subcommittee hearing on privacy.

Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., scheduled the hearing, which was entitled "Protecting Mobile Privacy: Your Smartphones, Tablets, Cell Phones and Your Privacy," after reports surfaced that Apple and Google were tracking users via location database files in iOS and Google Android.

Tribble, who served as manager of Apple's original Macintosh software development team and helped to design the original Mac OS and user interface, and Alan Davidson, Google's director of public policy for the Americas, participated in the second panel at Tuesday's hearing.

Schumer specifically took issue with apps like Buzz'd and Fuzz Alert, which "really only have one purpose:" to notify drivers when they get near checkpoints. "We brought these to the attention of RIM, they pulled the app down. I'm disappointed that Apple and Google did not. Why not?", This is my next reported Schumer as asking.

Davidson explained that Google's policy is to maintain and maximize openness, adding that the apps do not violate the company's policy. After being pressed further by Schumer, Davidson told the committee that Google is "actively discussing it" and he would take the senator's request back to the company.

"I hope that you narrowly look at this app. You agree that it is a terrible thing, and it probably causes death," Schumer responded.

Speaking on behalf of Apple, Tribble noted that some of the apps in question "are publishing data that's actually first published by the police department." However, Schumer dismissed the assertion as "sort of a weak read," adding that he knew of no police department "that would publish this [information] in realtime."

"We're in the process of looking into it -- we have a policy that we don't allow apps that encourage illegal activity," Tribble replied. "If the apps intent is to encourage people to break the law, then we will pull it. I will take that back."

After encouraging Apple to make a distinction between "the police department and an app that updates in real time," Schumer asked that both Google and Apple get him an answer in a month's time.
post #2 of 58
Our senators and congressmen are simply stupid.The courts have ruled that police cannot have DUI checkpoints unless they advertise the location and time to the public (newspaper) in advance of the checkpoint. Where do they think the app's information about the DUI checkpoints is coming from? The government says "no DUI checkpoint unless it is publicly announced", then wants Apple to remove an app that accomplishes what the government says police must first do. We have idiots for legislators. I'm not a proponent of DUI. In fact I personally think that DUI laws are far too lax. But that doesn't change the facts pertaining to this app and the stupidity of Sen. Al Franken, et.al.
post #3 of 58
Since when do you not have the right to report what you see on a public street?

Before cellphones we used to broadcast this information to other reps in our company using our pagers.

So is the senate proposing a ban on SMS and phonecalls as they also can be used to report to others what is happening in PUBLIC places.

Knowing where speed cameras are REDUCES the speed of traffic in the area which is the stated purpose of such devices, unless the bodies that install them want to come clean and admit they are there for revenue raising purposes using entrapment.
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this webpage so it was reloaded.A problem occurred with this...
Reply
post #4 of 58
"progressives" being "progressives"
post #5 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

"progressives" being "progressives"

I agree.
post #6 of 58
Cinemagic - You're absolutely correct!! I don't think Congress (both houses) understands the Fourth Amendment.

hill60 - I don't think you understand what entrapment is. I don't mean to sound like a jerk, but entrapment is the police/gov etc getting you to do something you normally wouldn't do then prosecuting you.
post #7 of 58
Idiots posturing, nothing to see here.

Ever heard of free speech, Schumer? And don't tell me Al Franken hasn't broken numerous drug laws during his stint at Saturday Night Live.

What hypocrites. All the more reason to get involved and vote dirtbags out of office.

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply

Proud AAPL stock owner.

 

GOA

Reply
post #8 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinemagic View Post

Our senators and congressmen are simply stupid.The courts have ruled that police cannot have DUI checkpoints unless they advertise the location and time to the public (newspaper) in advance of the checkpoint. Where do they think the app's information about the DUI checkpoints is coming from? The government says "no DUI checkpoint unless it is publicly announced", then wants Apple to remove an app that accomplishes what the government says police must first do. We have idiots for legislators. I'm not a proponent of DUI. In fact I personally think that DUI laws are far too lax. But that doesn't change the facts pertaining to this app and the stupidity of Sen. Al Franken, et.al.

These greasy thugs are way worse than stupid but you're on the right track. What they do is a stew of prostitution, graft, and legalized theft.

Aside from that of course, I admire our distinguished elected leaders. Yessir.
post #9 of 58
Interesting the Senate whines about breaking the law while they break our 4th Amendment rights to illegal search and seizure.

Checkpoints are open to the public and not on private property. What's the difference if someone decided to stand down the street and post it to Twitter or Facebook?

The non-removal of apps doesn't not cause death. The driver of the car does.
post #10 of 58
Yeah! Damned if I'm gonna let some liberul take away my god given right to get shit faced and kill me some kids!
post #11 of 58
I think the apps are a bad idea that encourage deviant behavior that endangers lives, whether they're legal or not. I hope Apple curates its App Store responsibly and takes them down. As others have pointed out, this information is already published elsewhere. There don't need to be apps for that.

"Be aware of wonder." ~ Robert Fulghum

Reply

"Be aware of wonder." ~ Robert Fulghum

Reply
post #12 of 58
If you are stinko and still have the presence of mind to drive around the checkpoints, then that's a test of skill, even under duress.

If you are NOT stinko, knowing where the stinko monitors are impeding traffic is not a bad ability to access.
post #13 of 58
Leaving the DUI issue aside for a moment, let me highlight the most relevant thing you said:

"We have idiots for legislators."

Unfortunately, we also have idiots for citizens. How else to explain why everyone is going about their business as though everything is perfectly ok while our elected representatives spend virtually all their time helping the banks and big corporations take over the entire country?
post #14 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by GQB View Post

Yeah! Damned if I'm gonna let some liberul take away my god given right to get shit faced and kill me some kids!

Just did a quick check and sure enough there are laws against the 2nd part no matter the instrument used.

Laws don't prevent crime. Do Apps?
post #15 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinemagic View Post

Our senators and congressmen are simply stupid.The courts have ruled that police cannot have DUI checkpoints unless they advertise the location and time to the public (newspaper) in advance of the checkpoint. Where do they think the app's information about the DUI checkpoints is coming from? The government says "no DUI checkpoint unless it is publicly announced", then wants Apple to remove an app that accomplishes what the government says police must first do. We have idiots for legislators. I'm not a proponent of DUI. In fact I personally think that DUI laws are far too lax. But that doesn't change the facts pertaining to this app and the stupidity of Sen. Al Franken, et.al.

Aside from the gratuitous insults about legislators that YOU elect to deal with problems like DUI (you could be elected yourself, you know, so what would that make you?), here is a very informative link to how one state manages checkpoints. As to apps, let's have a reasonable discussion where you and others can make your best arguments. Sometimes we lose sight of the real objective - reducing the terrible toll that intoxicated drivers take every year on thousands of innocent victims.

http://statepatrol.ohio.gov/sobcheck.stm

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #16 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

"progressives" being "progressives"



I consider myself a progressive and think DUI checkpoints are one of the biggest scams perpetrated on the public. They allow cops to stop drivers without probable cause and check them for violations not pertaining to DUI. It is a goddam intrusion into my liberty and I resent it immensely.

I hope that Apple will not kowtow to the politicians who are trying to please the police unions who love the overtime that comes with checkpoints.

Conservatives and progressives can oppose checkpoints AND the elimination of technology that notifies people to avoid them. http://goo.gl/L1PrG
post #17 of 58
Please oh Please will you remove apps that allow citizens to know about where the Police [so much for ``To Serve and Protect''] are so they can avoid them?

It sure as hell wasn't for this brew ha ha about selling your info to marketers. It's a whine session requested by Law Enforcement who whined to the DOJ who then passed the whining onto the Senate.


SIDE BAR:

As a progressive don't call this a Progressive Agenda. This has GOP written all over it. The crap they are pulling now in Florida with mandatory Drug Testing before you receive your unemployment, to all state employees to have random drug testing, etc., is BIG BROTHER.

Sorry, but the GOP is the Moral Minority Party who wants everyone to fall in line like Sheep and repent for our purported sins.

The stunts they are pushing through in a dozen major states is a reaction to knowing they are going to be thrown out on their rears in 2012.
post #18 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

As a progressive don't call this a Progressive Agenda. This has GOP written all over it.

Oh really, GOP all over it?
The four senators who wrote to Google and Apple?
This is from Senator Schumer's Web site:

In March, Schumer along with U.S. Senators Harry Reid (D-NV), Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), and Tom Udall (D-NM) wrote to executives at Google, Research In Motion (RIM, Blackberrys app maker) and Apple asking the companies to remove applications from their sites which could alert drunk drivers to DUI checkpoints.

Hmm, all four senators are DEMOCRATS.
Blind partisanship is so tiresome.
post #19 of 58
A friend of mine was caught driving drunk at a DUI checkpoint. I am glad he was; he didn't end up killing anyone, or damaging someone's property as a result, and he learned that he couldn't afford to drink and drive again.

Only an idiot thinks these checkpoints are used to violate someone's civil rights, or that overtime is a good excuse to stage one of these things.

If you are stopped at a checkpoint and probable cause is established to search your vehicle for drugs, stolen property, or anything else illegal, then good on the cop that spotted you for a criminal. If you drive off from one of these checkpoints without going to jail and only being inconvenienced, good on yo for being an honest person that has the privilege of being protected by your local law enforcement. If a cop smelled alcohol on your breath and did a field sobriety test on you as a result, then maybe that's a wake up call for you not to drink before you drive.

If you want to run an app to see if there is a DUI checkpoint on your way home from work, school, ,the bar, etc, then good for you. If you want to run an app to avoid a DUI checkpoint on your way home, because you know you are drunk, then you're too stupid to check the app before you drive home anyway. I don't know any criminal that is very bright, otherwise they would stop showing up at my local jail for the same reasons.
post #20 of 58
Troubles with Tribbles!!!
I've accomplished my childhood's dream: My job consists mainly of playing with toys all day long.
Reply
I've accomplished my childhood's dream: My job consists mainly of playing with toys all day long.
Reply
post #21 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDDave View Post

Oh really, GOP all over it?
The four senators who wrote to Google and Apple?
This is from Senator Schumer's Web site:

In March, Schumer along with U.S. Senators Harry Reid (D-NV), Frank R. Lautenberg (D-NJ), and Tom Udall (D-NM) wrote to executives at Google, Research In Motion (RIM, Blackberrys app maker) and Apple asking the companies to remove applications from their sites which could alert drunk drivers to DUI checkpoints.

Hmm, all four senators are DEMOCRATS.
Blind partisanship is so tiresome.

They are the 4 members in the Majority of the Committee. If the Republicans were the majority it would be 4 Republicans. That's how it roles when you have the majority position.

Get it?

They are the face for the entire committee and entire Senate, regarding this matter.

It's akin to Darell Issa now being chairman of his committee requesting businesses from all over to testify for his agenda.

Behind all of these faces are back drop agendas. In this case, it's Law Enforcement [who overwhelmingly vote Republican]. What's ironic is how these tools vote for the party that works at getting their jobs cut.
post #22 of 58
It's government being government. No government likes to be scrutinized. So they'll oppose all measures citizens take (such as these apps) to monitor the authorities, even if there is no legal grounds to oppose citizen initiatives, after all free speech exists for a reason, and why should we not be able to communicate, citizen to citizen about police activities on public property? But no, authority hates to be held accountable or reported upon... if it were up to them, everything would be "classified secret". It's BS.

I say we find other ways to stop DUI, not through the diminution of our rights.
post #23 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaCameron View Post

I think the apps are a bad idea that encourage deviant behavior that endangers lives, whether they're legal or not. I hope Apple curates its App Store responsibly and takes them down. As others have pointed out, this information is already published elsewhere. There don't need to be apps for that.

You have all the facts straight -- the information is required to be published, and reporting it via mass media is legal (local TV stations do it all the time) -- yet you hope Apple impedes the dissemination of legally aggregated information. Of course there don't *need* to be apps for that, but that's not among the criteria, is it?

As for Sen. Shumer's assertion, "You agree that it is a terrible thing, and it probably causes death," intentional lying for political gain is a world-wide pastime. Of course, all it needs to fail is an informed electorate. Oh, yeah....
post #24 of 58
Get them quick before they're gone! 
I have two spots near my home where the police like to stage these inspection points (for DUI and seatbelts) which I just find annoying so it's good to know when I have to drive around them to just get home to my family.
post #25 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

They are the 4 members in the Majority of the Committee. If the Republicans were the majority it would be 4 Republicans. That's how it roles when you have the majority position.

Get it?

I think you have your "facts" mixed up. The four who sent the letter in March have nothing to do with the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Here is the Committee list: 18 of them.
http://judiciary.senate.gov/about/members.cfm

The four senators who wrote the March letter and jumped on this issue, with "GOP written all over it", are not the "Majority of the Committee". Only Schumer is even on the committee.

Here is Schumer's blurb:
http://schumer.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=332783&
post #26 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by mdriftmeyer View Post

They are the 4 members in the Majority of the Committee. If the Republicans were the majority it would be 4 Republicans. That's how it roles when you have the majority position.

Get it?

They are the face for the entire committee and entire Senate, regarding this matter.

It's akin to Darell Issa now being chairman of his committee requesting businesses from all over to testify for his agenda.

Behind all of these faces are back drop agendas. In this case, it's Law Enforcement [who overwhelmingly vote Republican]. What's ironic is how these tools vote for the party that works at getting their jobs cut.

You are confusing "progressive" as Democrats and conservatives as Republicans. They are not one in the same.

The over extension of the commerce clause under FDR to regulate every aspect of a business is certainly "progressive" no matter if it is used by Democrats or Republicans.
post #27 of 58
I'm glad Apple sent someone to this "hearing" to stand up to these nimrods. Excuse me Chucky Shumer, do you even know what due process is? Or that US Citizens, as much as this must chafe your sphincter, are innocent until proven guilty?

Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

"I hope that you narrowly look at this app. You agree that it is a terrible thing, and it probably causes death," Schumer responded.

This one sentence cheeses me off more than anything. Because a) a narrow perspective is exactly what we do not need our lawmakers to have. They're supposed to serve the greatest number of people with the broadest measure of policy, not self-serving personal crusades. And b) "probably causes death" -- are you frikkin' kidding me?!? Not a single tangible statistic or point of reference, and this idiot wastes tax payer dollars and businesses' time on a witch hunt?

So much for freedom and self determination... this guy doesn't even qualify as a progressive; he's a frikkin' Communist. With baseless finger pointing and more tail chasing on the agenda, these Democrats are setting the stage for even more punishment by voters in coming elections. I wish I lived in New York, because I would be volunteering all my available time to campaign for anyone who is politically an anti-Shumer, to put that imbecile out of a job.

post #28 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Four U.S. Senators, including Sen. Charles Schumer, sent letters to Apple, Google and Research in Motion in March requesting that the companies remove apps notifying users of police sobriety checkpoints their respective application stores. Schumer raised the issue again at Tuesday's Senate subcommittee hearing on privacy.

I'm chuckling at this one. They don't consider Microsoft to even be a player in the smartphone app market so didn't bother to send them the letter? Ballmer must be throwing chairs by now.
post #29 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDDave View Post

I think you have your "facts" mixed up. The four who sent the letter in March have nothing to do with the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Here is the Committee list: 18 of them.
http://judiciary.senate.gov/about/members.cfm

Which simply confirms my personal belief. Our legislators are morons - regardless of party affiliation. Democrats and Republicans are equally moronic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Patranus View Post

You are confusing "progressive" as Democrats and conservatives as Republicans. They are not one in the same.

The over extension of the commerce clause under FDR to regulate every aspect of a business is certainly "progressive" no matter if it is used by Democrats or Republicans.

Actually, everyone uses 'progressive' incorrectly. The strict definition of 'progressive' is "favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, especially in political matters: a progressive mayor." Sadly, none of our politicians are working toward progress or improvement. Instead, they tend to either fight for the status quo or move backwards.

Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

My congratulations to Senator Shumer for not letting Apple and Google off the hook for hosting these terrible apps.

It's starting to become clear that neither of those companies has the basic respect for human life needed to take such an obvious step on their own.

Nice job in seeing only one side of the issue.

Since civil rights don't mean anything to you, let's just lock everyone up because some percentage of people are going to murder their children. If we lock EVERYONE up, that won't happen. If you're opposed to that proposal, you have no respect for human life.

Sheesh.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #30 of 58
Franken didn't ask the stupid DUI questions.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cinemagic View Post

But that doesn't change the facts pertaining to this app and the stupidity of Sen. Al Franken, et.al.
post #31 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

I have to admit, on a board filled with weak sauce defenses of Apple's miscues, equating drunk driving with civil rights really takes the cake.

Who did that?

I equated the legal right to know where police check points are - which is required by law - with civil rights.

No one is defending drunk driving. Sadly, people like you are so incapable of rational discussion that you have to make up stupid arguments to defend your indefensible positions.
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #32 of 58
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
post #33 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

Baloney. There's no need to know where DUI checkpoints are unless you're trying to avoid getting picked up for DUI.

Don't try to cloak your crap in civil rights and logic, because it's neither.

You're just plain wrong.

First, the LAW states that checkpoint locations need to be public. Not my opinion, but the law.

Second, there are very legitimate, legal reasons to know where the DUI checkpoints are. They tie up traffic. If you're in a hurry to get somewhere, you may want to avoid them. There's nothing illegal about that, nor does it have anything to do with DUI. Furthermore, there's a freedom of the press issue. If the press wants to take pictures of the police checkpoints, they have a legal right to do so - which requires that they know where they are (again, according to the law).

It really disgusts me that so many people are so eager to take away civil rights - and then base them on such fallacious arguments as "anyone who wants to know where police checkpoints are must be in favor of drunk driving".
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"
Gatorguy 5/31/13
Reply
post #34 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaCameron View Post

I think the apps are a bad idea that encourage deviant behavior that endangers lives, whether they're legal or not. I hope Apple curates its App Store responsibly and takes them down. As others have pointed out, this information is already published elsewhere. There don't need to be apps for that.

thats why the geniuses crafted the constitution the way they did. so that morons who can't understand or give a damn about freedom (such as yourself) don't get to make policy.
unfortunately most of the elected jerks don't understand the constitution either.
post #35 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by magicj View Post

Baloney. There's no need to know where DUI checkpoints are unless you're trying to avoid getting picked up for DUI.

Don't try to cloak your crap in civil rights and logic, because it's neither.

DUI checkpoints will write tickets for anything and everything they can find wrong, headlight out, etc, etc but that isn't the point really. sorry you are so dim you can't understand this at a higher level and what the real issue is.
post #36 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

You're just plain wrong.

First, the LAW states that checkpoint locations need to be public. Not my opinion, but the law.

Second, there are very legitimate, legal reasons to know where the DUI checkpoints are. They tie up traffic. If you're in a hurry to get somewhere, you may want to avoid them. There's nothing illegal about that, nor does it have anything to do with DUI. Furthermore, there's a freedom of the press issue. If the press wants to take pictures of the police checkpoints, they have a legal right to do so - which requires that they know where they are (again, according to the law).

It really disgusts me that so many people are so eager to take away civil rights - and then base them on such fallacious arguments as "anyone who wants to know where police checkpoints are must be in favor of drunk driving".

so true. people who use the 'if you ain't got nuttin to hide you shouldn't worry' are devoid of mental capability. would they also agree to allowing police to come into their homes at any time at any day just to look things over? sadly they would probably agree to that until it started happening then they would start to cry about it. these are the people that keep electing morons into office.
post #37 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta View Post

It really disgusts me that so many people are so eager to take away civil rights - and then base them on such fallacious arguments as "anyone who wants to know where police checkpoints are must be in favor of drunk driving".

Hear hear, jragosta. "Innocent until proven guilty" has been the mantra of our judicial system since the beginning, and if we don't fight for our inalienable rights, then we lose our freedoms to an idiot mob of nannies.

The opposite argument was also made in favor of the Patriot Act. And how many terrorist acts or crimes against humanity can its proponents truthfully claim it prevented? About the same number of drunk driving incidents directly related to the use of apps for avoiding police checkpoints (regardless of Chucky Shumer's biased intuition). ZERO.
post #38 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by screamingfist View Post

would they also agree to allowing police to come into their homes at any time at any day just to look things over? sadly they would probably agree to that until it started happening then they would start to cry about it. these are the people that keep electing morons into office.

Yep. Most people aren't aware that police do not have a right to search your vehicle on a routine traffic stop without probable cause, and without obtaining a warrant. Unless of course they ask and you allow it.

Human nature lends itself towards this allowance since most people don't have anything to hide. But at the same time there is a huge lack of awareness of how easy it is to give up your freedoms and right to privacy.
post #39 of 58
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanaCameron View Post

I think the apps are a bad idea that encourage deviant behavior that endangers lives, whether they're legal or not. I hope Apple curates its App Store responsibly and takes them down. As others have pointed out, this information is already published elsewhere. There don't need to be apps for that.

Total nonsense. The law requires that they post their times and locations. And besides, the current laws are overly strict - to the point of being ridiculous. When one or two beers can put you "over the limit" the law has gone WAY too far. I sympathize with "madd mothers" but they are pushing an excessive agenda. We've had enough of the puritans interfering with our lives! Enough already!
post #40 of 58
Honestly this is a total waste of time. Even if the app gets pulled from the app store, whats preventing the creators from just creating a web app for it instead? Since the app isn't doing anything illegal there is nothing they would be able to do to remove it if it simply was accessed via a web browser.

That is unless ICE decides it has reason to illegally seize its domain like it already has done in the past.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPhone
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPhone › Apple looking into senate request for DUI checkpoint app removals