Georgia college student reportedly received a ticket from a cop after a Flock camera flagged her newly purchased vehicle as having no insurance when it did. According to a WSB-TV report, posted by podcast host Kacee Allen, the car has a temporary license plate, but the student presented a valid insurance card. Despite this, the officer reportedly still issued a citation. The incident reportedly happened twice, and the student now has to defend herself in court

According to the news report, the database that Flock cameras rely on was yet to be updated. This caused the system to falsely flag the newly purchased vehicle.

Renee Jones, the student’s mother, said her daughter was doing everything required of her. This included maintaining insurance and carrying proof of coverage.

  • fartographer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Look, I’m not saying that I support these Big Brother-type companies, but if the cop is just gonna follow the instructions on their computer and not even think for themselves, then we should cut out the middleman. Flock should send tickets directly to offenders. You’re far less likely to get shot that way.

    <s>
    What recourse could an AI company possibly have over someone? Negative social credits.
    Run a stop sign? Social credit goes down. Rob a Walmart? Social credit goes down. Murder someone? Social credit goes down, but more. Safely follow all road laws? Fuck you, this counter only goes down. Have low social credit? Believe it or not, social credit goes down.

    How do we use these social credits to keep society in line? Public registry. Look up why anyone has their social credit score. Filter by thefts at Walmart and buy those people beers.
    </s>

    But seriously. If the Justice system is willing to automate and outsource police work, then get those fucking cops off the streets.

      • fartographer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        That sounds like a feature outside of the agreed set. As a compromise, the UI can have access to the device speaker and its LLM can shout “BANG” at random intervals.

    • Test_Tickles@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      Actually, a number of governments have contracted with private companies to handle certain policing duties like tolls or parking enforcement. Those companies then basically get all the rights of the government. I believe that it was NY City that was having a serious problem with parking enforcement stealing (impounding vehicles) and putting tickets on legally parked vehicles (about 10yrs ago) just to bump their profits.

  • SailorFuzz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    oh cool, so now we have a private company directing our police force.

    And the relationship is both symbiotic and exponential. The police make money writing tickets, that money goes to the local govenment, and that government can buy more flock cameras. More flock cameras, more tickets, more money, more flock cameras…

    Cyberpunk distophia here we come!

  • apftwb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    To continue, please select all the squares that contain a gun:

    black men holding wallets

  • SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    Honestly she should sue for malicious prosecution. She was driving the vehicle legally with insurance, she proved that to the officer by showing her paperwork, and then, knowing that she had insurance and the complaint was baseless, the officer wrote the ticket anyway.

    This should be an open and shut case.

  • xthexder@l.sw0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    What’s crazy to me is how this insurance database lookup even makes sense… Most insurance companies give you a grace period to add new vehicles if you have an existing policy. For mine in Washington, I have 14 days to tell my insurance if I’ve bought a new car, and it’s covered under my existing policy until then. Flock would have no way of looking up this information and has no justification to flag a vehicle like this…

  • ayyy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    Was she black?

    Edit: yup, she was black. I hope the officer suddenly runs out of blood soon.

    • Rhaedas@fedia.io
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      They have to. If they start admitted it’s making mistakes, there might be a push to take them down. And then we’re be sooooo insecure. Even though it doesn’t seem like the cameras are being used to actually fight crime.

      • empireOfLove2@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        Even though it doesn’t seem like the cameras are being used to actually fight crime.

        Just in the last week I noticed a huge uptick in news articles about crimes being solved “with the help of” Flock systems. They’re trying too little, too late to drive the narrative.

        • dil@piefed.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          Facebook is being flooded, thers a cat in the hat dude locally that is copying the clown trend from a decade ago, every braindead person on there is saying see this is why we need flock cameras and trying to jusitfy more.

  • Zak@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    In a just world, the officer, the police department, and Flock would all owe her compensation. I’d put the amount at about 10x the fine for the offense.

    • Melobol@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      The problem is that any fees cops get for doing stuff coming out of tax money.
      In a way I understand why, but it just bullshit at the end of day.

      • Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        A proposal I’ve seen floated a few times is to require police to carry liability insurance individually and give them a stipend for an average/reasonable amount. This is usually paired with changes to qualified immunity to make lawsuits and insurance claims easier.

        The idea is that risky behavior from police costs them money personally.

        • Melobol@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          2 months ago

          I’m wanting to say I like this idea, but…
          It just freaking sux. There are good cops out there who don’t need to be pumped into one insurance ideology (fraud) - but til the bad cops get the punishment they deserve there is no good solution.

          This is a general problem with the whole system - including unaffordable healthcare. If healthcare would be free; freakton of lawsuits wouldn’t happen.
          Without those lawsuits the insurance would go down, lawyers would not clog up the system with ‘got hurt in an accident’ cases - and this would reflect all parts of society.
          I believe the cops not getting punished for being bad is just one of the hundred symptoms of the system failing.

          • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            LMFAO… Good cops get abused in the police force. They never last. Sometimes they get harassed for life because they tried to stand up for what’s right.

            ACAB

          • kkj@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            Even in the fantasy world where the majority of cops are good, nothing changes for them. They carry insurance, the stipend pays for it, and they don’t have claims because they don’t do stupid shit like this. The bad cops have tons of claims, the insurance becomes unaffordable, and they have to quit.

          • alternategait@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            I mean doctors and other healthcare providers have malpractice insurance. For me, it’s a requirement to maintain my license.

    • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      Break it down; 2% cop 5% department 25% flock

      The extra 20 from flock goes back to taxpayers who had to pay the department’s portion.

      • Zak@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 months ago

        That adds up to 30%. Maybe you meant 25/50/25.

        I’d have to know more before breaking it down. If Flock told police departments that these alerts are up to date and reliable, I might assign them up to half the blame. If there were clear that the information could be a few days old, then I’d set it smaller, but not to zero because I think offering an “alert” product to law enforcement for minor administrative offenses based on stale data is irresponsible.

        Similarly for the department and the officer, I have to ask whether there’s a policy about how to handle this sort of thing. If there’s a bad policy, the department gets most of the blame. If the officer decided to ignore a valid insurance card and trust a third-party database, the the officer gets most of the blame.

        • helpImTrappedOnline@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Oops, I wasn’t really doing the math as I went

          Originally I was adding up to your 10x + a adding in bunch extra for flock, but somepoint my brain switch that 10x to 10%. Oh well, the specific numbers dont really matter.

          I think greater responsibility should be placed on the department to encourage firing. If the burden is mostly on the officer, than the department bean counters won’t care as long the officer can write more “valid” tickets to offset the bogus ones.

          Its also like if a waiter drops a tray of food on someone causing injury. Who is financially responsible to the injured person, the business or waiter? I think most of would agree that the business is. The business is fully within their rights to fire that waiter, but they can’t withhold pay for the damages. If the business can prove the tray was intentionally thrown, then they can sue the waiter. But, the injured party should never have to talk to the waiter.

          Should the be the same for an officer, if they make a mistake it’s on the department to make it right with the affected parties. If the department proves the officer maliciously broke protocol or law, then they can sue them separately. The victim of the officer’s actions should be made “whole” by the department, then the department and officer can figure it out on their own.

          • Hacksaw@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            This is how it works now, but who pays the department’s legal bill? Municipal tax payers. It’s zero accountability. Each cop should be insured like doctors and engineers. That’s the only way to make it work that isn’t just wasting taxpayer dollars.

    • taiyang@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      It certainly sounds “more legitimate” than pulling them over for a failure to use a blinker or doing too sharp of a left turn, as friends and victims of DWB can attest to having happened to them.

      Although given the paper trail here, it is probably easier to fight in court.

        • taiyang@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          You know, you’re not supposed to cut over the center dividing line when you turn but plenty of people do if you’re not making a perfect arc with your turn (and I mean, just a little bit). A friend got pulled over for it. We both agreed it was probably racial.