Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Microsoft Puts Police Link on Messenger 253

Posted by ScuttleMonkey
from the land-of-false-positives dept.
SirClicksalot writes "Microsoft is working together with the UK Child Exploitation & Online Protection Centre to help protect Windows Live Messenger Users. UK users will be able to report suspected sexual predators directly to the police. From the article: 'Microsoft will add a "report abuse" icon to Messenger that will link any users worried about their anonymous internet buddies directly to online police services. Set up earlier this year to provide a single point of contact for the public, law enforcers and the communications industry to report the targeting of children online, CEOP offers advice and information to parents and potential victims of abuse and works with police forces around the world to protect children.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Puts Police Link on Messenger

Comments Filter:
  • abuse (Score:5, Insightful)

    by User 956 (568564) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:13PM (#15965557) Homepage
    Microsoft is working together with the UK Child Exploitation & Online Protection Centre to help protect Windows Live Messenger Users. UK users will be able to report suspected sexual predators directly to the police.

    Oh yeah, I can't see this being abused at all. Especially by teenagers just screwing around.
    • Re:abuse (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) * <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:16PM (#15965579) Homepage Journal
      Oh yeah, I can't see this being abused at all. Especially by teenagers just screwing around.

      Damn straight. We're going to see a story about the dossing of Britains online police services before the dupe of this story appears. (imagine a lol, I'm not a sexual predator [slashdot.org] worm)
      • Re:abuse (Score:5, Interesting)

        by bwthomas (796211) <bwthomas@g[ ]l.com ['mai' in gap]> on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:28PM (#15965694)
        In the US we have something called 'filing a false police report' or something similar, and as i recall it actually has some pretty scary consequences associated with it, all things considered. It would stand to reason that the UK has something analogous.
        • Re:abuse (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Whiney Mac Fanboy (963289) * <whineymacfanboy@gmail.com> on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:31PM (#15965723) Homepage Journal
          something called 'filing a false police report' or something similar, and as i recall it actually has some pretty scary consequences associated with it

          I don't think a worm (or someone prepared to make one) is going to be afraid of the consequences, regardless of the jurisdiction.
          • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

            by bwthomas (796211)

            Yeay, that comment was supposed to be in response to this comment [slashdot.org], rather than the one it's parented by currently; i probably clicked on the wrong link, but i choose to blame the slashdot moderators.

            stupid moderators <grumble, grumble, grumble ... >

          • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

            by HarbingerKtS (979609)
            If MS were intelligent, they could make it so that the entire chat log from the time the conversation started to the time the button was clicked were included along with any acct info they have as well as the IP address of both the person reporting and the person being reported. Doing that would enable any law enforcement agent quickly determine if it was a false report or something with merit.
            • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

              by Anonymous Coward
              thats a good idea. they should also provide all the searches done under that ip through msn. Maybe microsoft could create an api so other search engines such as google could supply the searches related to that user/ip. Amazon too could supply any purchases that have been made such as something incriminating such as the novel Lolita.
        • Re:abuse (Score:5, Informative)

          by ari{Dal} (68669) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @06:27PM (#15966091)
          Charges for filing false police reports are all fine and good, but how much do you think that's going to mitigate circumstances?

          Eg:

          "Headline news: Alleged pedophile Joe Sixpack arrested and detained after revolutionary new feature in MSN allows users to report for soliciting sex from underaged kids."

          Two months later, page 38, buried somewhere beneath an ad for preperation H: "Joe Sixpack acquitted of all charges. Fanny Jones arrested for filing a false police report."

          Once you're accused of being a pedophile, the damage is already done.
          • True enough, but the question has to be asked why Joe "Annnymous Coward" Sixpack was talking to Fanny Jones in the first place.
            I do realize that a lot of abuse comes from trusted people - but isn't this feature's target Joe "AC" Sixpack hence breaking down the thin veil of anonymity?
          • by bwthomas (796211)

            That's a really good point, one exacerbated by the profession of the accused; anyone with a youth related career (teacher, youth minister, psychologist, coach, &c.) would still receive a forcible and early retirement without condolences or concern.

            However, i think about it and i realize that "Headline news: Alleged pedophile Joe Sixpack arrested and detained after revolutionary new feature in MSN allows users to report for soliciting sex from underaged kids." will be on the front page no matter what,

          • by crossmr (957846)
            Especially when the American public doesn't understand what a pedophile is..
        • and as i recall it actually has some pretty scary consequences associated with it,

          Probably not as scary as the consequences for online gambling in Washington State!

          I know, offtopic... I still get a kick out of some stupid laws like that sometimes.
      • Re:abuse (Score:5, Informative)

        by 56ker (566853) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:30PM (#15965714) Homepage Journal
        IANAL but,:-

        "
        Wasting police time - section 5(2) Criminal Law Act 1967

        (Archbold 28-224)

        The offence of wasting police time is committed when a person

                * causes any wasteful employment of the police by
                * knowingly making to any person a false report orally or in writing tending to:
                * show that an offence has been committed; or,
                * give rise to apprehension for the safety of any persons or property; or,
                * show that he has information material to any police inquiry.

        It is a summary only offence carrying a maximum penalty of six months' imprisonment and/or a level 4 fine.

        The public interest will favour a prosecution in any one of the following circumstances:-

                * police resources have been diverted for a significant period (for example 10 hours);
                * a substantial cost is incurred, for example a police helicopter is used or an expensive scientific examination undertaken;
                * when the false report is particularly grave or malicious;
                * considerable distress is caused to a person by the report;
                * the accused knew, or ought to have known, that police resources were under particular strain or diverted from a particularly serious inquiry;
                * there is significant premeditation in the making of the report;
                * the report is persisted in, particularly in the face of challenge.

        "

        Just in case you were wondering a level 4 fine is £2500.

        That's from the Crown Prosecution Service's website. [cps.gov.uk]
    • Re:abuse (Score:4, Interesting)

      by niceone (992278) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:18PM (#15965605) Journal
      It'll be interesting to see how this plays out - isn't there are crime called "wasting police time" or something? Can you be prosecuted for clicking that icon without good cause?
      • Sure, but who knows what information they'll glean from people that have been falsely e-cused? Through the course of the investigation, who knows what they could dig up for charges.

        Do you have encyclopedic knowledge of all laws in all jursidictions and the details of all precedent-setting cases under every one?

        Are you certain you have nothing to hide?
      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by Ruff_ilb (769396)
        Yes, there is a law called just that -

        Section :5
        Sub-Section :2
        Act :Criminal Law Act 1967
        Subject :Wasting Police Time Or Giving False Report
        It is an offence to waste Police Time or to give a false report.

        Fixed Penalty Amount :80.00
        Method of Trial :Summarily

        http://www.police-law.co.uk/law/policelaw.nsf/1649 e8496940e5e380256ba8006061d3/b14a0b225311b86e80256 db300697bbc!OpenDocument [police-law.co.uk]
      • by Angostura (703910)
        More importantly, can you be prosecuted when a piece of malware 'clicks' the button?
        • More importantly, can you be prosecuted when a piece of malware 'clicks' the button?

          Can they prove it was you rather than malware?

          In Britain, would you have to prove it was malware?
        • Re:abuse (Score:4, Interesting)

          by jc42 (318812) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @06:02PM (#15965930) Homepage Journal
          More importantly, can you be prosecuted when a piece of malware 'clicks' the button?

          And its best if you're using wifi, and you've covered yourself (and your IP address) by turning off security. As the recent case showed, with an open access point, you can simply say "It wasn't me; it could have been any neighbor using my wireless" and the prosecution won't have much an argument, because you'll be telling the literal truth.

          At least here in the US, almost everyone has just a single IP address for everything past their modem, so everything using your wifi will have the same address, and there's no way at all to prove which of the many computers in the neighborhood may have clicked that button.

          If you're on an open wireless AP, you can accuse as many people you want of as many crimes as you want, and nobody can prove it was you.

      • Can you be prosecuted for clicking that icon without good cause?

        That's a scary thought. I certainly wouldn't use any software in which accidentally clicking the wrong button calls the police!
    • by avronius (689343) *
      Yes officer, that was 'User 956'.
      And I'm not just calling because he beacause he fragged me...
    • I think someone has watched too many episodes of the Simpsons and thought the Springfield Online Police Report was a good idea.

      Bless The Simpsons [i-bless.com]
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Tackhead (54550)
      > Oh yeah, I can't see this being abused at all. Especially by teenagers just screwing around.

      Well, that is the problem, isn't it? (Can't you sickos stop thinking of the children for a bit? :)

    • by Brigadier (12956)


      I'm sure the users name address and info will be submitted to the enforcement agency and will pop up when the officer responds and given most law i'm sure anyone who plays with the option will find them self on the sticky side of the law.
    • Oh yeah, I can't see this being abused at all. Especially by teenagers just screwing around.
      No we can't trust the teenagers to do this properly. The will screw around with it, either out of ignorance, or just for kicks. Protecting the children is too important to be left up to them, so expect to see new software that scans incoming and outgoing streams for certain words, then makes the online report itself.
      Initially, such software will be optional.

      [/sarcasm]
  • Hmm (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Klaidas (981300) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:16PM (#15965580)
    This is a good idea, But... how many false alarms will there be? If every alarm has to be investigated, there will be a lot of wasted time.
    Besides, we all know how kids like clicking everywhere.
    • Maybe it's more of a deterrent measure. Like "BEWARE OF DOG" signs when there's really no dog, that are just meant to deter would-be burlars. So maybe the police won't investigate every alarm, but the existence of the alarm cuts down on the offenders.

      In any case, there might be a threshold (e.g. N complaints against a particular user, where N = 5, 10, or whatever) that must be reached before an investigation is actually commenced.
  • direct to police?! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Speare (84249) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:16PM (#15965587) Homepage Journal

    One of the most convenient ways of destroying someone's life forever is to hint that they're a pedd-o to the police. One of the least credible sources of information is through chat and blog and instant message internet services. This sounds like a great way to completely twist the whole of society tightly around the axle for years to come.

    • This sounds like a great way to completely twist the whole of society tightly around the axle for years to come.


      Works for me. As far as I can tell, the whole of society is long overdue for a proper sorting-out.
    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by hoki_goujons (930597)
      One of the least credible sources of information is through chat and blog and instant message internet services
      I think the opposite in this case - the police get a standardised package straight from the user of chat transcript, times, IPs and file transfer: 'I think this guy is a paedo, here's the reasons why'. The police see exactly what the complainant has just seen.
  • predator detection (Score:3, Insightful)

    by flidigital (997364) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:17PM (#15965592) Homepage
    Microsoft and everyone else has more important things to do than build 'predator features' into their software.
  • by Oddster (628633) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:17PM (#15965600)
    Anybody else greatly reminded of the Warning feature on AIM? No, people aren't going to screw around with this at all, everybody will be fair and sensible and only use it when justified.
  • by UbuntuDupe (970646) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:17PM (#15965601) Journal
    LilJen1992 says:
    __OMG LIEK TEHER IS SUM RILLY CREPY CHAP TAH WANTS ME TO ... UGHGHGHGH!!!!11
    Constable Nigel says:
    __4 ril?
    LilJen1992 says:
    __Yeh he is so grss!!!1
    Constable Nigel says:
    __kk jess gimme his s/n
    • by Tackhead (54550) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:54PM (#15965886)
      LilJen1992 says:
      __OMG LIEK TEHER IS SUM RILLY CREPY CHAP TAH WANTS ME TO ... UGHGHGHGH!!!!11
      Constable Nigel says:
      __4 ril?
      LilJen1992 says:
      __Yeh he is so grss!!!1
      Constable Nigel says:
      __kk jess gimme his s/n

      LilJen1992 says:
      __kk its 111-111-111 plz kick hiz ass 4 me.

      Constable Nigel says:
      __aight i put on my uniform and bobby hat.

      LilJen1992 says:
      __What the f*ck, again?

      Constable Nigel says:
      __damn I still gotta write down your names or something.

  • by MosesJones (55544) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:20PM (#15965623) Homepage
    Some people here have been saying "what about the abuse" well seeing as they will know who is reporting the abuse then if you are just pratting about then those same police who are looking for predators can also send a threating response for wasting police time (a punishable offence). Unlike making crank calls from a telephone box this is very traceable.

    Good idea, and well done Microsoft.
    • by taskforce (866056)
      I'm assuming you've never heard of a proxy server? MSN has support for these.
    • by Jugalator (259273)
      I guess it's easy enough to detect for repeat offenders or people making the wildest claims, but what about a user that hasn't reported anyone else in the past and suddenly reports someone at school for being pissed at him. While it's a punishable offense, that doesn't stop the police from having to spend resources on it since they can't just dismiss it. Now take enough users doing this (you just need a fraction of a percent for a few million users) and I think it's easy to see the problems.
      • I assumed that the button would send user info for both sides, as well as a transcript of the conversation, so that the officer/investigator could evaluate the case and make a good preliminary determination. You wouldn't be able to just "press the button" and report someone by their e-mail address.

        The way I'd work it would be to have the aforementioned info sent, then have the police quickly follow up with a quick e-mail message to the accusing party with something like "If you really meant to send this, c
    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Cal Paterson (881180)
      Some people here have been saying "what about the abuse" well seeing as they will know who is reporting the abuse then if you are just pratting about then those same police who are looking for predators can also send a threating response for wasting police time (a punishable offence). Unlike making crank calls from a telephone box this is very traceable.

      Except that emails aren't traceable. At all. Especially the throwaway ones on things like dodgeit.com. You should be concerned about the abuse.
      • by Software (179033)
        >Except that emails aren't traceable

        Well, if MS has half a brain, they'll send the email from Microsoft's servers, and digitally sign it. So at least the police will know it came from Micrsoft's servers. This is not foolproof and won't prevent silly kids / stray cats / malicious worms from clicking the "Report Abuse" icon. Actually, TFA says nothing about the delivery mechanism: could be email, SOAP requests, snail mail, or a fax machine, for all we now.

        • Well, if MS has half a brain, they'll send the email from Microsoft's servers, and digitally sign it. So at least the police will know it came from Micrsoft's servers. This is not foolproof and won't prevent silly kids / stray cats / malicious worms from clicking the "Report Abuse" icon. Actually, TFA says nothing about the delivery mechanism: could be email, SOAP requests, snail mail, or a fax machine, for all we now.

          Sorry, dashed off that reply - should've made it clearer. I wasn't worried about the d
  • And This Works How? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by nbannerman (974715) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:20PM (#15965628)
    I have three seperate accounts I use to log into MSN Messenger's services, via passport.

    Only one of them contains any personal information about me. The other two, which are in use most often, are full of completely bogus information.

    Hypothetically speaking, where exactly would any online 'police service' get in such a situation? I think this has the potential to be a good idea, but I'm curious to see how many resources are going to be thrown behind this, given how easy it is to enter completely false data from the word go.
    • by Azarael (896715) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:27PM (#15965687) Homepage
      Because M$ could send them your ip as well. If they keep any kind of logs of which IP you generally access MSN from, they could do at least as good of a job as the RIAA does (lucky you). Unless you always use a good proxy, there is a pretty good chance they could figure out who you are, if they tried.
      • Well, I have to admit, after my initial posting, I did have a think about IP addresses. The problem, as I see it, is that I don't take any massive steps to cover my IP address or hide. But, if I wanted to, I could get round having the IP address linked to me.

        Hell, with wi-fi spreading around in an unsecured state (I get 4 networks in my bedroom), it is entirely possible to have an online life without ever getting connected using your own phone line / cable.

        I'm a techy, and I tend to think of technical
        • by rs79 (71822)
          ", I have to admit, after my initial posting, I did have a think about IP addresses."

          The IP addess identifies the machine, not the user.

          I have a bunch of machines here but only one is used by people directly. I use it to work on and my two kids play on it from time to time. For some reason *cough* none of that IM shit seems to work on this machine (sorry darlings, it just won't load right. Life's a mystery).

          My ex wife is more liberal with her machine and the kids IM like mad there. She has tons of bestialit
    • by vidarh (309115)
      If there's any real indication that you might have broken the law, they'd get your home address by getting a court order for your ISP to reveal who was logged in via a certain IP address at a certain time.
    • by Vancorps (746090)

      They only need your name on an IM network. Then they can set traps for you. They don't need to identity you right away. Just pretend they are kid and wait for the creep to pounce on you. From there you can show him some pictures on your website which will of course capture the IP address of his machine at the time. Being still in the conversation that leaves ample time to get personal information from the ISP of the predator in question.

      At first I thought this was a terrible idea because of possible abuse

      • Just pretend they are kid and wait for the creep to pounce on you.

        Certainly an interesting way of dealing with the situation, but wouldn't this be covered by entrapment? Not that I'm meaning to sound dismissive, but baiting a trap is normally frowned upon.
        • Generally, but since the population so despises these people, that fact is summarily ignored every time.
        • by bnavarro (172692)
          Entrapment is when you are coerced or tricked into doing something you would not normally do.

          Case in point: A few years ago, there was a local case (San Diego, CA) where a man went online looking for an older, single woman for romance. He met someone online claiming to be a female lonelyheart, and correspondance ensued. After a time, the "woman" asked him what he wanted to do to her sexually. He wrote a raunchy e-mail to her, detailing various sex acts. The "woman" then said, sounds nice, now, tell me
  • by Winterblink (575267) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:23PM (#15965646) Homepage
    ... is that it's the poor police who'll be feeling abused.
  • by TractorBarry (788340) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:24PM (#15965657) Homepage
    Well thank goodness for that.

    At last someone is thinking of the children.
  • by syousef (465911) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:27PM (#15965690) Journal
    We already have ways of reporting pedophiles. You can pick up the phone, you can write a letter, or you can walk into a police station. It doesn't need to be made any easier. Why don't people do this? Because their confidence in the police is low. They think the police either won't act for lack of evidence(in which case it can be a waste of time or worse the police might acuse them of making the situation up), or the police may over-react to information given and you could ruin someone's life based on a vague suspicion.

    What you need to do is increase confidence in the police by making sure they always respond appropriately to legitimate complaints. Adding a "report a pedo" form is just plain silly.
    • by taustin (171655)
      ...or the police may over-react to information given and you could ruin someone's life based on a vague suspicion.

      While I agree with you in general, the above isn't a problem with the police. It's a problem of idiots reporting "vague suspicions" to the police. If it is possible for the police to overreact, then you shouldn't be reporting it.

      But that still makes this current idiocy a bad idea.
    • Building a case (Score:3, Insightful)

      by complexmath (449417) *
      Another reason people don't file police reports for this sort of thing are all the technical barriers that must be overcome: the complainant has to provide contextual information, at least including the time the incident occurred and who was involved. The police would then traditionally have to obtain warrants, contact AOL or MSN or whoever and pull IP logs, then do the same with the respective ISPs to get names and addresses. And if there is no reliable log of the conversation then the accused can deny t
      • by syousef (465911)
        "Think of the children" huh?

        God forbid the police should actually have to do some work before charging someone with an offence! Any information that could be collected at that point should be easy to collect later. To say we have "nothing" to do this now is just plain incorrect. The question is whether the records should be kept. You don't think there will be many fake reports? Are you serious. A bunch of kids who still think the net is anonymous are going to have the maturity to only report pedos and not t
  • by Nereus (733242) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:28PM (#15965697)
    From TFA:
    In June, a 21-year-old media student from Surrey became the first person to be convicted of child grooming offences...
    Caught in possession of a child with perfectly styled hair and dapper clothing?
  • by nurb432 (527695) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:31PM (#15965716) Homepage Journal
    So now you can rat out anyone you feel like, even when they do nothing wrong just beacuse you are an ass.

    Bring down the man on them.. Good way to scare away users.
  • Add to /. (Score:5, Funny)

    by fahrbot-bot (874524) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:33PM (#15965732)
    Perhaps /. can add this kind of "feature" as a moderation?
    • +3 Funny
    • -2 Predator
  • by ScooterBill (599835) * on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:33PM (#15965737)
    How about a button that alerts the IRS? or the SEC when someone on a stock chat room brags about something not quite legal? or the private investigator that's checking up on the housewife who seems to be having a bit too much fun online...
    • by couchslug (175151)
      How about an app to drop a dime on anyone you suspect of doing anything illegal?
      It could send logs, screen grabs, etc as desired to any/all of a menu of law enforcement agencies.
      I'm not serious of course, but it's probably a matter of time until someone who is devises Stasi-at-home software.
  • by Megane (129182) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:39PM (#15965780) Homepage

    ...you click on the button, then John Cleese appears in a London bobby's uniform. "Wot's all this, then?"

    (not to be confused with the Young Ones version where Neil appears in a London bobby's uniform saying "Woah, like chill out, man.")

  • by Jtheletter (686279) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:39PM (#15965781)
    This will be heavily abused by kids just messing with each other. Yeah, no one would ever click this button as a joke on their friend. Without some sort of punishment for abuse of the system by the submitter this will work the same as blanket phone wiretaps - simply increase the size of the haystack in which one is searching for a needle.
  • by Foofoobar (318279) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:41PM (#15965796)
    Can't wait for the first messenger worm to start reporting everyone on your buddies list as sexual predators.
  • by andrewd18 (989408) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:43PM (#15965805)
    Yet another reason to use something other than MSN for instant messaging chat programs.
    1. Integrates with my MSN Passport so people can link my screen name to location information about me.
    2. Shows everybody the e-mail address I registered with; whee!
    3. Smileys that were beaten with the ugly stick (although not as bad as the 1990's-esque AIM smileys)
    4. Integrates with Outlook Express so that I can't turn it off if I'm e-mailing (unless I hack the registry)
    5. xxxsmgpwnagexxx and kittyluv1492 can now label me as a sexual predator with a click of a button
    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Baloo Ursidae (29355)
      Shows everybody the e-mail address I registered with; whee!

      And for the vast majority of users, so does Jabber. It obsoleted the commercial IM systems when that open standard was ratified last summer. The user@host format for referring to specific users isn't going away any time soon.

      Likewise, you have to give someone your email address to ever receive email, and if you do that, any and all munging is rendered permanently and irrevokably useless [interhack.net]. Get over yourself. Email addresses aren't private, ple

  • bad idea (Score:3, Insightful)

    by moxley (895517) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @05:51PM (#15965868)
    I think that this is a horrible idea that can only serve to weaken online privacy (what little there is left), security (these days being secure to me means being protected from harassment or worse from the police state as much as being protected from normal criminals).

    I think that everyone who has said that this will be abused by idiots and kids is right, for the most part - but my real problem is that this is a first step to eroding anonymity (or semi-anonymity) online, because once that button has been there for a little while, then the authorities can say - "Well, we now need every IP to be verifiably tied to an ID because online police buttons might be pushed and we can't go throught trying to figure out who all of these sceennames are."
  • "Abuse of "Report Abuse" Leads to Feature Removal"

    Unless the "Report Abuse" also submits details as the submitter as well (Username and IP/hostname in particular). Still, I can see trolls mass-reporting people to the police because they visit a forum the trolls hate because they were banned quite fairly... as an example.

  • Others have already noted the abuse such a system facilitates and that other convenient reporting systems exist. So here's something else.

    Users of Microsoft's Messenger email service will be able to report suspected sexual predators directly to the police at the click of a mouse.

    I hope there's a confirmation dialog box and not just a single click. I mean, who hasn't made honest accidental clicks?

    And assuming that this does involve a few steps, do the police investigate you if you stop at any point? Like w

  • On the positive side, it is good to know that I can contact the police in case of an emergency. On the other hand, what if this service is NOT available in my area? What if I get a 404 message when a creepy axe murder/peophile breaks into my house?

    What do I do?
  • So the police will get 50 complaints an hour about how Jimmy Russell is calling timmy Hall a retard or the like.

    In the meanwhile, perverts will continue to get away from it because no one realizes what they are doing is "abuse".

    Personally my plan is thus.

    1. Create worm.
    2. Send worm out to get messengers to send reports about "creepy old guy who says he has lots of money named Billy gates"
    3. Get article on Slashdot
    4. Laugh because police have already ignored the report abuse button during the 12 hours it too
  • In Soviet Russia.. err wait...
  • by Peter Cooper (660482) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @08:23PM (#15966658) Homepage Journal
    Yep, I bet we'll have a 'Report as Terrorist' icon soon too. And we know how lax the definition of 'terrorism' is in the Terrorism Act here in the UK.
  • by crossmr (957846) on Wednesday August 23, 2006 @09:43PM (#15967007) Journal
    They stick like shit. They're honestly the worst policed, and worst handled crime out there. Societies reaction to them only compounds the issue.

    Given the stigma attached to them in just about any society going, they should be handled like a black ops. There should be an immediate gag order on the proceedings from the time of the complaint until a verdict is reached unlesss an extreme need can be proven for otherwise.

    I lost count but I was keeping track of all the false rape and other claims being made from the beginning of the year. www.dailyrotten.com is great for that. All the stories where "Woman cries rape..oh wait..video evidence provided shows she was shooting a porn film" kind of stories, and other stuff.

    I've now required that any woman I'm to have sex with have a form filled out in triplicate, with 4 witnesses and then notorized. I usually require this being taped by a neutral third party. Usually I just arrange to have sex at the police station with at least 2 officers watching so that all is legit.

    Back to the black ops. Any reporter found releasing information about an arrest or trial about a sex crime before its concluded should be shot as an example. If the claim is found to be outright false, the complainant should be subject to no less than 5 years in jail. If its not guilty, everyone gets a cookie and goes home.

    The amount of stories I've read about teenagers who've accused a teacher of a sex crime then x amount of years later turned around and said "Oh.. we uh..made it up" is ridiculous. This tool serves no purpose other than to further this type of behaviour.
  • Screw the damn kids (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Jesus IS the Devil (317662) on Thursday August 24, 2006 @12:46AM (#15967590)
    Who cares about kids? Why are they so freakin special? If you want a button, have it be a button to notify the police of illegal activity, period. Crimes are being committed against all sorts of people. Kids are nothing special.

    It's the damn parents that are responsible for their kids. Don't have time to watch them? Don't have kids!

The meat is rotten, but the booze is holding out. Computer translation of "The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak."

Working...