Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

UCSD Lecturer Releases Geotagging Application For "Dangerous Guns and Owners"

timothy posted about a year ago | from the guns-are-meant-to-be-dangerous dept.

Privacy 976

NF6X writes "UCSD Lecturer Brett Stallbaum has released an Android app called Gun Geo Marker to allow people to 'Geolocate Dangerous Guns and Owners.' The app description states: 'The Gun Geo Marker operates very simply, letting parents and community members mark, or geolocate, sites associated with potentially unsafe guns and gun owners. These locations are typically the homes or businesses of suspected unsafe gun owners, but might also be public lands or other locations where guns are not handled safely, or situations where proper rights to own or use any particular type of firearm may not exist.' I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

1 2 3 4 I declare flame war (5, Funny)

Nimey (114278) | about a year ago | (#44224499)

This article will have mature and reasonable discussion, let me tell you.

Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224599)

I can certainly see that some of the threads will be reasonable.

With the reoccurring school shootings I would rather see schools with a strict "no guns at home" policy pop up.
You seldom see a random gun nut shoot at his neighbors. It is way more common that a person that is way too young to understand the full implications of death gets hold of a gun. Most of the time nothing bad happens but I would prefer to put my kids at a school where all parents agree to not have guns at home just too minimize the risk that some kid finds it and takes it to school.
Everyone thinks that "my child would never do that" or "my kid would never look through my bedroom drawer while I'm at work" but that is pretty delusional.

Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224725)

By your own statement, "You seldom see a random gun nut shoot at his neighbors," it actually makes more sense for responsible adults to have access to guns at home and at school. Also, why don't we ever see mass-shootings at inner-city schools? Is it because there is a better chance the shooter would likely be facing return fire?

Move to Europe. (-1, Troll)

Barryke (772876) | about a year ago | (#44224853)

Move to Europe. Not kidding.

We agreed upon that years ago. If you have a weapon here, you better have a good reason and comply with some stringent safety measures.
The only school shootouts we've seen here, where inspired by US shootouts.

Re:Move to Europe. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224877)

Also, we have more than two political parties. Actual democracy.

Re:1 2 3 4 I declare flame war (5, Insightful)

Penguinisto (415985) | about a year ago | (#44224797)

Why isn't the argument basis for geotagging potentially violent people of any stripe, no matter what their weapon of choice? Ah, it's the ideology. Bound to stir up some flamage.

You know? Yesterday, there was a bit of a protest as the local longshoremen decided to clog up our building and get noisy for a bit (the business they were protesting occupies a floor in the building). After seeing one of the protesters walking in with a sign nailed to a baseball bat (and a rather agitated look on his face), not to mention the rather battle-ready attitude of most the strikers (and then seeing this article today)? I kind of wonder why everyone fixates on weapons, when the problem is people... I mean, if the argument was about dangerous weapons, then maybe someone ought to geotag all the farmers who live next to truck stops, since a mixture of diesel fuel and fertilizer is way the hell more dangerous than a gun could ever be.

Given all of that, the argument is, IMHO, nothing more than a way to agitate for an ideology centered around what the guy considers to be a scary weapon... and nothing more. It's a means to put a stigma on gun owners that someone, somewhere thinks to be 'dangerous' (whatever that may mean) - much like one would geotag sex offenders or other 'undesireables' (in that person's mind).

Well, fair enough I guess, if that's what floats his ideological boat. Then again, I hope he can afford the potential lawsuit that would come from someone being incorrectly 'tagged'...

All guns are dangerous... (2, Insightful)

Smivs (1197859) | about a year ago | (#44224501)

aren't they?

Re:All guns are dangerous... (5, Insightful)

jittles (1613415) | about a year ago | (#44224575)

aren't they?

Not as dangerous as lecturers at public universities. I think I will write an app that allows you to geotag your local professors, track their license plates, and give you hints and tips on how to heckle them and ruin their lives for doing things that you may or may not agree with.

Because its not like you couldn't call the police if people are doing unsafe things with guns. In a lot of places there are laws about the safe handling of weapons.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224747)

aren't they?

Not as dangerous as lecturers at public universities.

Jittles - Nice jab at academia. So true. So true.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (2, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about a year ago | (#44224817)

Because its not like you couldn't call the police if people are doing unsafe things with guns. In a lot of places there are laws about the safe handling of weapons.

And I'm sure the police and those laws were a great comfort to all of those victims of gun violence and rampage shootings, and 100% effectively prevented any deaths.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224883)

[sarcasm]

And I'm sure the police and those laws were a great comfort to all of those victims of gun violence and rampage shootings, and 100% effectively prevented any deaths.

[/sarcasm]

Isn't this the same argument gun owners say why average people should own and carry guns?

The Last Lonely Man ? (0)

Thud457 (234763) | about a year ago | (#44224583)

All guns are dangerous...
aren't they?

that's point.

First Amendment > Second Amendment.
Welcome to another fun facet of living in a fully networked world (see: Snowden, Apple/Google user stalking, etc, etc, ad nauseum)

Re:The Last Lonely Man ? (4, Insightful)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year ago | (#44224755)

Might want to read the constitution again. Your understanding of the second amendment is lacking...

Re:The Last Lonely Man ? (5, Insightful)

Culture20 (968837) | about a year ago | (#44224897)

First Amendment > Second Amendment.

Constitutional amendments are not arranged in a hierarchy.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (1, Troll)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#44224619)

aren't they?

I assume that(at least in theory, I assume that it will swiftly degenerate into some mixture of 'round up all the guns!' and '2nd-amendment-keyboard-warrior-trolls', leading to a rather useless dataset), the mention of 'parents' implies a concern about improperly secured guns, a favorite of dumb children, with some side functions for 'We are pretty sure that this guy has a foundation composed largely of dead hookers' and 'these are the woods were people get wasted and shoot at absolutely anything that moves like a mammal every fall'.

Given the author's bio(he appears to be part GIS-dev, part performance artist) the app seems like a pretty logical outcome; but not something of any use except to get people worked up(which can be useful, and entertaining; but this isn't god's gift to informative maps).

Re:All guns are dangerous... (3, Insightful)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about a year ago | (#44224667)

Only when democrats use them*

1. Ft Hood~~~ Registered Democrat ~ Muslim

2. Columbine ~~~ Too young to vote; both families were registered Democrats and progressive liberals.

3. Virginia Tech ~~~ Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff ~ Registered Democrat

4. Colorado Theater ~~~ Registered Democrat; staff worker on the Obama campaign;
Occupy Wall Street participant; & progressive liberal.

5. Connecticut School Shooter- ~~~ Registered Democrat; hated Christians.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (3, Informative)

Archangel Michael (180766) | about a year ago | (#44224739)

Posted as a joke. Don't get your panties in a wad.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224771)

This has nothing to do with motive. Guns shoot themselves, didn't you know? Let's forget why people kill but rather the tools that they use to do it with is what we need to focus on. Just like we don't need to know what Snowden leaked, just that he leaked it.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (1)

oh_my_080980980 (773867) | about a year ago | (#44224773)

And the right winger who shot Congresswoman Gabby Giffords.....

Re:All guns are dangerous... (4, Informative)

RoccamOccam (953524) | about a year ago | (#44224867)

Perhaps you are being sarcastic, but (from Wikipedia, highlights mine):

Records show that Loughner was registered as an Independent and voted in 2006 and 2008, but not in 2010.[39][40] A YouTube channel under an account called "Classitup10" was linked to Loughner. (There have been numerous copies of 'impostor accounts' such as 'JaredLoughner' and 'Classitup1O'.)[41][42]

Loughner's high school friend Zach Osler said, "He did not watch TV; he disliked the news; he didn't listen to political radio; he didn't take sides; he wasn't on the Left; he wasn't on the Right."[17] But a former classmate, Caitie Parker, who attended high school and college with Loughner, described his political views prior to 2007 as "left wing, quite liberal,"[43] "radical."[44]

Re:All guns are dangerous... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224899)

And the right winger who shot Congresswoman Gabby Giffords.....

...uh, also a progressive Democrat. 0/6 on the 'it was a crazy right-wing gun nut!'

Re:All guns are dangerous... (1)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | about a year ago | (#44224783)

When guns are outlawed, only democrats will have guns.

Re:All guns are dangerous... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224749)

Today its guns...tomorrow?

Re:All guns are dangerous... (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224869)

Tomorrow? Penises, cuz all men are rapists and pedophiles.

Geotag those military bases! (2, Insightful)

magic maverick (2615475) | about a year ago | (#44224515)

The most dangerous people in society with guns are the police and the military. The police kill far more civilians with guns than any other single group, other than the military.

So, geotag the bases and locations of known members of the biggest gangs around! The occupation is rough, let's make it rougher for them.

Re:Geotag those military bases! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224597)

How many police shootings have there been so far this year in the USA? Can you link to the stat? I know there have been around 219 murders and 1,000 shot in Chicago area alone so far this year... oh wait, those were not by police...and guns are banned there... Never mind.

Re:Geotag those military bases! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224769)

That's odd.... how could you have so many shootings in a city where guns are banned? Oh... wait!... Criminals don't follow laws.

Re:Geotag those military bases! (1)

i kan reed (749298) | about a year ago | (#44224643)

I think you'll find the U.S. Military is actually really good about gun safety, on the level. Armories aren't easily accessed and reasonable safety precautions are taken for every live-fire exercise.

Re:Geotag those military bases! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224811)

And yet they still manage to shoot a huge number of people per year.

Re:Geotag those military bases! (2)

magic maverick (2615475) | about a year ago | (#44224815)

And yet they still manage to shoot and kill civilians! Oh wait, those are "potential terrorists" and "collateral damage" (yeah, some guys were firing some weapons in the air, so we blew the shoot out of them, what do you mean that's how they celebrate weddings? what sort of fucked up culture celebrates weddings by having the shit blown out of them?).

Re:Geotag those military bases! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224691)

I'm pretty sure the police have special legal protections about concealing their home addresses.

Re:Geotag those military bases! (1)

rossdee (243626) | about a year ago | (#44224847)

"The police kill far more civilians with guns than any other single group"

Maybe its better not to have a gun then if you are a civilian

" other than the military."

The US A military tends to mostly kill non-US civilians. (Although many of them are shooting at the US military, so I think those should be fair game)
  One answer to that is to not have the US military in foreign countries , and at least Obama is doing that...

Re:Geotag those military bases! (1)

Penguinisto (415985) | about a year ago | (#44224861)

Dunno about you, but having been in the military, and having done IPSC events as a civilian alongside cops?

I can tell you that I trust a typical soldier's sense of gun safety (and accuracy!) far more than I would trust a typical police officer's.

No Way This Can Be Abused (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224517)

This will obviously be 100% used for legitimate purposes.

Libel (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224519)

Wouldn't users who tag someone as a dangerous gun owner run up against potential libel laws?

oh boy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224525)

Start complaining... now.

And the rest of the world says (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224527)

Americans and their guns

Re:And the rest of the world says (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224791)

non-Americans say the darnedest things don't they?
Respect Middle Eastern cultural differences, let us not pass judgement!
Respect Asian cultural differences, let us not pass judgement!
Respect African cultural differences, let us not pass judgement!
America has no culture, even though they have a different way of life than us. Let us pass judgement freely!

your nearest gun is here (5, Funny)

jamesh (87723) | about a year ago | (#44224529)

I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party.

It differs because a list of people belonging to a religion or political party doesn't help you if you need to find a gun in a hurry.

Re:your nearest gun is here (1)

dkleinsc (563838) | about a year ago | (#44224665)

It also differs because the people with lots of guns has the means to kill a lot of people. I'm not saying that people without a lot of guns couldn't kill a lot of other people, but the fact of the matter is that a nutjob with a knife is a lot easier to stop than a nutjob with lots of guns.

Re:your nearest gun is here (2)

gandhi_2 (1108023) | about a year ago | (#44224813)

A nutjob with a knife in a Japanese school, it turns out, is hard to stop.

Especially in a gun-free society.

Re:your nearest gun is here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224835)

Also, people believed to belong to a particular political party can be easily checked against publicly available online records which can instantly confirm if a person has ever had affiliations with known political parties. Religious beliefs are just about as simple assuming you've ever been a member of a religious organization that had a "members" list or filled out a survey that asked for it. Hell, many religious people actively want you to know what religion they belong to.

The real question is why aren't guns as easily checkable as someone's political party or religion?

Re: your nearest gun is here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224865)

A nut job with a knife is only easily stopped by someone with a gun. Definition of ironic.

Re:your nearest gun is here (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about a year ago | (#44224673)

I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party.

It differs because a list of people belonging to a religion or political party doesn't help you if you need to find a gun in a hurry.

What about the list of members of the 1st Guns & Moses Reformed Church?

Re:your nearest gun is here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224675)

I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party.

It differs because a list of people belonging to a religion or political party doesn't help you if you need to find a gun in a hurry.

That's an absolutely asinine statement. This app is targeted at marking "unsafe" gun owners, not illegal, and has nothing to do with "finding a gun in a hurry". In other words, all anti-gun users of this app will do is use it to mark all known gun owners. What is the criteria for determining "unsafe"?

Really, it's just a creepy stalker app. You could use it for hot girls. Creepy. Stalker. With the added benefit of letting anyone using it who ISN'T concerned about the alleged well-being of friends and relatives know where people own guns.

Re:your nearest gun is here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224781)

You need to review the law, particularly the law of unintended consequences, and you're probably overdue for a recalibration of your sense of humor.

Re:your nearest gun is here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224745)

It ain't just differ, it actually complements!

Let's say you have that app that geo tag religion + political + gun.
I think this could be pretty usefull to avoid dangerous areas...

Lets go after law abiding citizens (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224533)

But make sure not to do this for criminals, right?

Who chooses the "dangerous" sites??? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224535)

"As a crowd sourced information tool, the information about dangerous gun sites comes from users." In other words, if I have a grudge against my neighbor, or just want to mess with somebody, can I just post that they are "dangerous" and their home/location appears in the app??

Re:Who chooses the "dangerous" sites??? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224591)

Hhmm. Good idea.

Re:Who chooses the "dangerous" sites??? (4, Insightful)

camperdave (969942) | about a year ago | (#44224645)

"As a crowd sourced information tool, the information about dangerous gun sites comes from users." In other words, if I have a grudge against my neighbor, or just want to mess with somebody, can I just post that they are "dangerous" and their home/location appears in the app??

In other words, this will last until the first politician gets tagged.

Re:Who chooses the "dangerous" sites??? (1, Insightful)

Thud457 (234763) | about a year ago | (#44224829)

no, you :
1. anonymously list them in the database as a "dangerous gun owner".
2. then you call in a domestic violence report to the police.
at the very least, his door gets kicked in, his dog gets shot and he gets zip-tied and thrown to the ground with a boot on the back of his neck.
If he IS a gun owner, he get shot dead.
3. Lawsuit!

Wrong strawman (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224541)

"I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party."

Should be comparing the geopositioning of dangerous guns and owners to sex offenders.

Re:Wrong strawman (4, Insightful)

lxs (131946) | about a year ago | (#44224593)

This is worse. At least the latter were proven to be sex offenders in court (flawed as the process may be) according to the summary, no actual proof is needed to end up on the map.

Re:Wrong strawman (1)

Jaysyn (203771) | about a year ago | (#44224669)

This is worse. At least the latter were proven to be sex offenders in court (flawed as the process may be) according to the summary, no actual proof is needed to end up on the map.

Great point. So how long do you think it will take for the 5 million plus NRA members to make this dataset completely useless once they are aware of it as a group?

Re:Wrong strawman (1)

Trepidity (597) | about a year ago | (#44224821)

This map doesn't have any force of law, though, unlike the sex offender registry. You are not required to register yourself on the map each time you move, for example.

Kind of Lawsuits a Lawyer will love (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224549)

This has litigation written all over it, lible, invasion of privacy, etc. He won't begin to be able to afford the swarm of lawsuits if people start actually using the app.

Re:Kind of Lawsuits a Lawyer will love (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224627)

If the app uses publicly available information, how can it be privacy invasion?

Re:Kind of Lawsuits a Lawyer will love (3, Insightful)

NicBenjamin (2124018) | about a year ago | (#44224767)

Uhh...

You do realize that in the US "Invasion of Privacy" is perfectly legal as long as the invaders aren't the government? The first amendment says that if I find something out about you legally you have no right to stop me from telling everyone else about it.

Libel could conceivably be an issue, but a) the safe harbor provision should protect him, and b) if the person saying it believes it to be true it's not libel. Since many, many Americans define unsafe gun ownership to mean any gun ownership it's gonna be mighty tricky to prove that they should have known that keeping the damn things unloaded in a gun safe is safe.

That last bit is also why the list won't be terribly useful. If people start using it it will basically be a map of suspected gun-owners, because most people who post to something like that don't know/care whether you've got the damn things locked up in a case or not.

Fear Mongering (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224551)

How about police stations? Will they be tagged?

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | about a year ago | (#44224653)

How about police stations? Will they be tagged?

As a matter of practice, are cops dangerous gun owners, or are they mere dangerous gun users, with nominal ownership of the hardware lodged in some municipal entity?

Re:Fear Mongering (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224779)

Most law enforcement people I know purchase their own sidearms and backup weapons, although at a discount. The shotguns and ARs in the cars are provided.

Reviews on Play are hilarious! (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224563)

It's more than worth the effort to read through the reviews on Google Play for this thing. Not only is it telling that the community rating is so low it induces tears of sympathy, the reviews are funny as all hell! Nicely done.

I've seen this before. (5, Insightful)

Sponge Bath (413667) | about a year ago | (#44224565)

A long time ago, some people at UT Austin put signs in front of dorms listing "potential rapists" that had the names of all male residents. Indiscriminate and unsubstantiated accusations do not serve a useful purpose.

Crowdsourcing! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224567)

I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party.

Get ready, then, because those are coming too. If it's technically feasible in software, it will exist eventually, regardless of whether it's a good idea.

Good intensions, bad idea. (5, Insightful)

Deemus (115875) | about a year ago | (#44224573)

Criminals rejoice! No longer do you have to randomly break in to houses to see what there is to steal. There's now an app to tell you exactly which houses to rob.

Re:Good intensions, bad idea. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224633)

Don't worry, they have handguns for the express purpose of "protecting them from intruders". I'm sure it will work out fine.

Re:Good intensions, bad idea. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224763)

I'm doing my part by tagging everyone in my vicinity.

Probably won't last long (1)

eth1 (94901) | about a year ago | (#44224581)

I predict this guy will be sued out of existence shortly.

By claiming the app marks "dangerous" gun owners, he's making claims that would probably be libellous in almost all cases (but IANAL).

Not to mention the first person to get burgled, then discover their house is marked in his app will probably sue, also. And also not to mention the victims/families if the guns stolen in such a case are used in a crime.

Re:Probably won't last long (1)

Xest (935314) | about a year ago | (#44224701)

"Not to mention the first person to get burgled"

That can't happen. As someone from a country where much gun ownership is banned I have been reliably informed by American NRA supporters that I should push for removal of said gun controls in my country because guns prevent crime, hence, if they have guns, they can't possibly get burgled. The guns prevent that.

CUZ RELIGION AND POLITICS NEVER KILLED ANYONE !! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224587)

Only people with guns kill !! No gun, no harm, no foul, no GEO-TRACKING !!

Hypocrisy (4, Funny)

Muad'Dave (255648) | about a year ago | (#44224611)

And I suppose this UCSD Lecturer would also support an app "to allow people to 'Geolocate Dangerous Liberal Socialists'" that threaten the Constitution?

I didn't think so.

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224723)

or what about a Jew app that lets you mark out where the Jews have been hiding and what business are owned by Jews. There would be no potential for abuse of such well intentioned app.

Re:Hypocrisy (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224885)

Most dangerous to our way of life is the crushing price to attend universities. Perhaps people get a gun to kill themself after finding out how much they owe. Maybe that UCSD Lecturer is part of the problem, over-paid, under worked and full of it.

We Need an App to GeoLocate Treasonous Jews (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224613)

We know who did 9/11. We know who is collapsing our country. We know who is turning America into a surveillance state.

Open Source? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224615)

Is it open source? If it is, someone fork it and turn it into its exact opposite, listing those who don't have them, and see how people react to that.

Geotagging non-gun owners (2, Informative)

BenJeremy (181303) | about a year ago | (#44224617)

OK, Slashdotters, who wants to help me make a geotagging app that crowdsources locations of people and businesses who are NOT gun owners so that legitimate users can use this as positive reinforcement of the anti-gun ideal?

It will allow users to personally thank those non-gun owners (and businesses) for their thoughtfulness toward others and their pacifist approach toward dealing with an increasingly dangerous and violent world.

I think Brett Stallbaum should be the first address in the database.

Re:Geotagging non-gun owners (2)

Jaysyn (203771) | about a year ago | (#44224705)

It will allow users to personally thank those non-gun owners (and businesses) for their thoughtfulness toward others and their pacifist approach toward dealing with an increasingly dangerous and violent world.

I understand your sentiment, but it's really a much less dangerous & violent world than compared to even 10 years ago.

Re:Geotagging non-gun owners (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224875)

Which is kind of amusing, when you consider that 10 years is almost exactly when the Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired. I know, I know, correlation and causation. This probably isn't the cause of crime going down, but it certainly shows that it didn't go up.

Quote got it right (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224621)

I question how the motivation behind developing this app differs from, say, developing an app to allow others to publicly geotag homes of people believed to belong to a particular religion or political party

Exactly, they could be just as likely to threaten lives and kill people.

wowsers (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224635)

Can I also geotag people with packs of dogs? (Sorry - I think every dog individually might be lovable, but I don't trust them in groups.)
On the think of the children line, how about swimming pools, trampolines, or alcoholic parents?

But in the end someone is getting attention for being controversial. So meh to all my strawmans.

Gun nutz (1)

Rich_Lather (925834) | about a year ago | (#44224651)

Brett Stallbaum must be a closeted meta-prepper.

Someone post the apk! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224677)

POST THE APK! my phone is registered 30 mins too far north :)

Gun radar (1)

gmclapp (2834681) | about a year ago | (#44224703)

It seems to me this will promote more school/movie theater style shootings in no gun zones by dynamically showing a potential serial killer "no gun zones" on the fly.

Geotagging idiots (1)

wcrowe (94389) | about a year ago | (#44224707)

Great. Perhaps there should just be an app for geotagging idiots. After a few years there would be a tag on everyone. Because everyone is thought to be an idiot by someone.

There's quite a few places like that (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224711)

Oakland public transport seems dodgy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=IAHjhtYZpX0

28.79295N 81.32965W
Is a known dangerous spot for gun crime:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Trayvon_Martin

I think anywhere there is a black man and a racist near each other, is likely to be a gun crime area, but how you can track moving targets like that I don't know.

its certainly something. (1, Troll)

nimbius (983462) | about a year ago | (#44224741)

Disclosure: I dont own a gun.
The app seems like its going to anger quite a few people who hold the second amendment dear. I can see instances in which the app is used by police to target dissenters before an organized protest on the guise they plan to start a riot. Or perhaps the map is used by criminals to identify homes without firearms. marking an entire neighborhood is bound to lower property value. However in many cases the recourse for average citizens to do anything about a mentally unstable neighbor that owns a gun or guns is pretty limited. The viet-nam vet who pipes michael savage throughout the porch and parades around the back yard in fatigues with an assault rifle literally was my neighbor for 4 years in suburban ohio. i cringed every time i saw a girl scout or jehovas witness approach the door. The neighborhood association did nothing and the local police, despite the fact the man had been banned from a local public festival and a wal-mart, simply acknowledged him to be an interesting character.

The site asks if I know anyone who does not use a gun lock, and considering as i live in a state that leads the nation in child firearm fatalities [slate.com] im inclined to use the app to report people who dont use them.

I expect that there will be one huge blob (0, Flamebait)

Chrisq (894406) | about a year ago | (#44224743)

I expect that there will be one huge blob .. covering the whole of Texas

Time to tag Brett Staulman's house then (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224751)

nt

I suspect (1)

Dereck1701 (1922824) | about a year ago | (#44224757)

I suspect there will be a few more "undesirable persons/situations" apps in the near future if this one catches on. An app for singling out the LGBT community, one for locating Muslims, I'm sure we'll get one for locating people with STDs. There's a reason why this kind of "spy on your neighbor" behavior has been looked down upon from the beginnings of civilization, it gets out of control real quick.

Who decides who is on this list? (1)

bradley13 (1118935) | about a year ago | (#44224759)

It must make him feel good to run his own personal little blacklist. And the data is "crowdsourced" - totally in keeping with the times: "see something, say something", otherwise known as minding your neighbor's business. How much do you have to piss someone off, to get added?

Of course, he will scrupulously check all additions for correctness, keep the data up-to-date when people move, and offer recourse to people who are added in error. And I have a bridge I want to sell you.

From California, what a surprise...

It's ok. (4, Insightful)

Areyoukiddingme (1289470) | about a year ago | (#44224761)

Hadn't you heard? After a persistent astroturfing campaign, more Americans think Edward Snowden is a traitor than otherwise. They're obviously fine with a surveillance state, so this app is perfectly acceptable.

Right?

I'd like to see the results of a survey that correlates opinions of Snowden with opinions about this database. Wanna bet there's a substantial overlap of people who can simultaneously believe Snowden is a traitor while believing this database and app are wrong? While being blissfully unaware of the contradiction.

Such is the power of the modern propaganda machine.

I tried tagging... (1)

luckytroll (68214) | about a year ago | (#44224765)

The entire USA, but it seems to want more specific coordinates.

But seriously, a name-and-shame app for people who are afraid of firearms seems a bit futile in the USA. It would be like a Jew in early 20th century Germany making an app to tag anti-Semitic individuals, institutions, and businesses....

Oh that (1)

Cosgrach (1737088) | about a year ago | (#44224801)

will never be abused.

Geotag gun-free homes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224807)

Add police response times as mouse-hover balloons.

Harrassment (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#44224837)

This sounds like a tool to harrass people participating in constitutionally protected activities. Typical liberal tactic: embarrass people who are doing nothing wrong.

Geotagging as an Invasion of Privacy (1)

careysub (976506) | about a year ago | (#44224843)

Geotagging law-abiding lindividuals in anything other than an opt-in/easy-opt-out arrangement should be considered a straight-up invasion of privacy. We do have privacy laws, and privacy standards in legal precedents and this would seem to already run afoul of them. If not, then some speedy legislation to clarify that it is should be enacted.

Even for people with criminal records though, there needs to be limits on geo-tagging. With the world's highest percentage of incarcerated people. the U.S. needs to be able to allow former criminals to reintegrate productively in society. This must be handled case-by-case of course, but former criminals have rights as well.

Good intentions, poor implementation (1)

Bearhouse (1034238) | about a year ago | (#44224881)

So...

..."These locations are typically the homes or businesses of suspected unsafe gun owners"

Suspected?

I'm all for crowdsourcing; it's fine for things like OpenStreetMap, for example.
Here, though, it's clearly open to dangerous abuse.
If you just look at the example on the linked site, "new neighbour leave guns unsecured around kids", well, the bad guys will be dropping round to collect those asap, right? How about if someone labels me as such, for a "joke" or worse, and then the same bad guys come round to my place when my wife is there alone?
And beat the crap out of her since she cannot produce the guns, because there are none?

If you have reasonable suspicion that someone is behaving badly with guns, your duty is to call the cops, not update some damn stupid app.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?