Cops Trolled Driver's License Database for Pic of Hot Colleague

Originally posted by HawkeyeNation
Oh for #### sake...I used to work for a huge financial service and we would look up celebrity files all the time. Were we told not too...yes but it was done anyways. I did not use any of the info to profit it was just pure looking at. Cops are doing it is no different then the other 5 million corps that have personal data.

And that makes it acceptable ? You would be ok if I did the same to you ? What if I used that same information for anything from identity theft to general harassment ? I have no doubt this type of thing goes on in just about any profession, won't argue that point with you. I'm fairly certain if the information was hacked and dumped the same law enforcement would pursue the crime to its fullest. Are people not entitled to some degree of privacy and shouldn't those who have access to personal/private information be held accountable when that information or access to information is abused ?

brill

Originally posted by HandyDandy

Originally posted by webpirate
reply to post by WozaMeathed

 

Exactly. I'm guessing every single one of us....male and female....just had to click and look too. Like I said... let he who is without sin...cast the first internet hate mail.

The difference would be that we didn't hack into a restricted database to do it.

Incorrect,
You still looked at the picture, did you not???????
So resticted database or not, your curiousity got the better of you and you looked, so that make's you as bad as the police and the rest of us, its that simple.

Yes....when you illegally access an internet site...it is called hacking.....and is illegal no matter what the intention was or is.

So whats your point?????
Its Not the same, as no police hacked into anything, they just abused their privledges as officers.

Originally posted by WozaMeathed
Incorrect,

I'm incorrect that I didn't use my position to go look on a restricted website?

What restricted website did I look at again?

You still looked at the picture, did you not???????

You obviously missed the point.

Yes, I looked at a picture of her.

I DID NOT go to a restricted website to look at it. Huge difference.

So resticted database or not, your curiousity got the better of you and you looked, so that make's you as bad as the police and the rest of us, its that simple.

No, it is not that simple.

You are saying just because I can look at your picture on facebook, I should be able to go to any restricted website and look at other information about you because gosh darn it, I already have access to your picture through facebook, why shouldn't I have access to other information?

That line of thinking is what is the problem here.

Its Not the same, as no police hacked into anything, they just abused their privledges as officers.

Abuse of power to look at restricted information is illegal and considered hacking.

If you want to argue the matter please post the law and not your opinion.

reply to post by HandyDandy


No. They didn't hack into anything. They have constant immediate access. What used to be limited to a desk cop or dispatcher with that computer or information, now every single cop on the streets these days has a computer in their vehicles that is directly linked into that data base. There was no hacking involved.

If I went and looked into that database. It would be hacking. Because I do not have an access code or password. They all did.

reply to post by HandyDandy


My point has nothing to do with the law or my opinion.
All I said was...and so is Woza is that they did look. And if you had the access, and can honestly stand up here and tell the rest of us you would never never ever use your access to something others don't normally have just to satisfy a curiosity then by all means....pick that ideological rock up and start hurling it.

If however, you can not honestly say you had the access but would never ever look at anything for any reason other than official business as part of an official police matter, then you, my friend, are a hypocrite.

First of all, I agree with RockPuck... Why? She's not much to look at. The 'after' picture is a bit better but still...

I just don't find this all that scandalous. The workplace can be gossipy. If someone you knew but rarely saw got a bunch of surgery and dropped a ton of weight I think you would be curious too and I almost guarantee given the opportunity 90% of members on this site would do the same thing.

Are you saying that male police officers are MALE? If you cut them with a knife they will bleed real, red blood?

Astonishing. Whowouldathought.

Originally posted by BellaSabre
Are you saying that male police officers are MALE? If you cut them with a knife they will bleed real, red blood?

Astonishing. Whowouldathought.

Actually...I wasn't limiting it to just male officers. Especially since I'm sure at least a few of those hits were were females too.
And that's only the human ones though. The reptilian officers bleed green.

reply to post by webpirate

The reptilian officers bleed green

That's true, of course. I forgot about those green-blooded slimy things.

Oh you guys are mean. She's not that ugly. She actually looks good with the tan going. If you want to see ugly just look in the mirror. You guys are just jealous.

She's not even THAT attractive, i've seen waaaay hotter cops, but apparently there are none around their parts.

reply to post by Domo1

I just don't find this all that scandalous.

Maybe if they looked at pictures of your wife, you'd view it differently.

Originally posted by webpirate
If I went and looked into that database. It would be hacking. Because I do not have an access code or password. They all did.

I take it you haven't heard of the "computer fraud and abuse act" enacted in 1984?

Criminal offenses under the Act


1.Knowingly accessing a computer without authorization in order to obtain national security data
2.Intentionally accessing a computer without authorization to obtain: Information contained in a financial record of a financial institution, or contained in a file of a consumer reporting agency on a consumer.
Information from any department or agency of the United States
Information from any protected computer if the conduct involves an interstate or foreign communication

3.Intentionally accessing without authorization a government computer and affecting the use of the government's operation of the computer.
4.Knowingly accessing a protected computer with the intent to defraud and there by obtaining anything of value.
5.Knowingly causing the transmission of a program, information, code, or command that causes damage or intentionally accessing a computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, causes damage that results in: Loss to one or more persons during any one-year period aggregating at least $5,000 in value.
The modification or impairment, or potential modification or impairment, of the medical examination, diagnosis, treatment, or care of one or more individuals.
Physical injury to any person.
A threat to public health or safety.
Damage affecting a government computer system

6.Knowingly and with the intent to defraud, trafficking in a password or similar information through which a computer may be accessed without authorization.

en.wikipedia.org...

It may not be "hacking" (semantics) but it certainly IS illegal. And yes....looking at a picture of a fellow cop in the database just to satisfy your curiousity and not work related is considered "without authorization" because the cops are NOT authorized to use this database as a facebook substitute.

reply to post by webpirate


Whether I would or not is moot. It is still illegal. Bottom line.

And yes, I've had access to things in the past which I NEVER accessed because I knew it would be illegal. So, your point gets shot down again.

Although going by the nom de gaurre "webpirate" I'm sure you don't really care about what is legal and what isn't? Just a guess.

reply to post by HandyDandy


I wasn't arguing technicalities. I could argue none of that applies here, since there was no attempt to defraud or anything else associated with it.

I agree it was wrong. I agree it was probably against department policy. I agree it was used for something other than official business.

All i said was...I would lay money that there is NO ONE here...who if they had unrestricted access...and yes..it was unrestricted..even if it was technically restricted....the access was there. And I bet everyone here would do the same.
It is human nature. Plus...it is so common now to look up everything about everyone. The cops I mean. Because it is much easier now than it used to be...even 10 years ago. This isn't an isolated case either I'm sure. There is no one here who can honestly say they would never use such access if they had it 100% never for something other than official business. NO one. Everyone would look something up just because they could.

I'm not saying it;s right. I'm saying it's human nature.

You mean to tell me that these officers where violating department policy by looking her up in a federal database when these jokers could have use facebook?? And by the way, ok she's pretty for a kodak moment but not hot by all means!

That only tells me what kind of women these cops are marrying nowadays to be tripping on that.