quote:

Originally posted by 911Boss:
Even with the “pro illegal” and “defund the police” attitudes in this bastion of democratic socialism, latest polls have about 75% of the people in Seattle (basically 100% of the non-criminal population) wanting the flock and CCTV cameras ON to try and reduce crime and catch offenders (not that it will do much good given the catch and release mentality of area judges).

Watching an area known to have problems is one thing; surveilling everyone, all the time, is quite another.

quote:

Originally posted by vthoky:

Watching an area known to have problems is one thing; surveilling everyone, all the time, is quite another.

I haven't heard anyone say they oppose legitimate real-time use of such a system. Putting more cops in a high crime area is good. Radioing ahead to other officers to catch a fleeing suspect is good.

It's, as you say, surveilling everyone all the time.

I think a lot of people have lost sight of the agreed upon tradeoffs between security and freedom. We agree that some criminals will escape conviction rather than have a Stazi style police state. Police and prosecutors must stay within the lines, even when there is zero doubt the suspect is guilty. Objectively this increases our risk. Freedom has risk.

Were there no history of government or corporations abusing citizens, there's a lot we'd agree to. We law abiding citizens would happily invite police to search our car or home. We'd be happy that our favorite retailers knew our preferences.

I wonder what the sentiment is amongst the pro-Flock crowd as they go through TSA at the airport?

Every time I read of these omnipresent surveillance cameras, I can't help thinking of this:



They should not be used as the sole evidence against the accused. Oops,too late, they already are and have been for some time - speed and red light cameras.

I'm sorry. I don't see the point of having millions of cameras following me around, just for the 0.01% they are used for good publicity. We have gang members, drug dealers, sex traffickers roaming the streets, right now, instead of rotting in a prison system due to the inability to understand incarceration is not ONLY for punishment and rehabilitation, but also for incapacitation.

No. The ONLY reason the Flock/Axon systems exist is to build profiles on every citizen. Profiles they can use to sell your data to not just other corporations, but to the government, so when its attention focuses on you, you already have a digital noose around your neck.

Government and Corporations will NEVER be able to prove they aren't keeping said data forever. We can therefore assume any data obtained will eventually be leaked, like the ATF just showed us.

quote:

Originally posted by Fly-Sig:
legitimate real-time use

A key phrase, sir.

Texas governor blocks agencies from spending state money on Flock - THE TIDE IS TURNING!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUwY2BcNShw





I look for a dog and pony show from elected officials, with new legislation/laws carefully worded to mitigate the fears many have concerning these cameras with a end result that really changes nothing. It may require another automated step or two but they will still have access to the same data. There is too much money behind this.

quote:

Even with the “pro illegal” and “defund the police” attitudes in this bastion of democratic socialism, latest polls have about 75% of the people in Seattle (basically 100% of the non-criminal population) wanting the flock and CCTV cameras ON

I wouldn’t consider the pro flock attitudes of a majority of Seattle’s population a ringing endorsement, if anything, I would take it as a warning. The majority of Seattle’s population are not sane.

There is now a Flock in the parking lot of a grocery store and its accompanying businesses that I frequent. However, it is clearly marked as such, with signage including a QR code and a flashing blue light. It appears to be only functioning as passive security and might even discourage miscreants from miscreanting in the first place. Nevertheless, should I be worried? Put on a disguise?

After getting beat up last week at a townhall while defending Flock as a useful law enforcement tool, our sheriff announced that due to the new state rule and the overwhelming feedback from the community, Jacksonville is shutting down the system and will remove all the LPRs.

The 3 western most FL panhandle counties just fell in line with state orders as well. Shutting down FLOCK for now.

They are gonna wait and see how this FHP shitshow turns out and how many millions they will pay some poor lady locked up for 13 days. Because flock said her black dodge was really a maroon dodge involved in a hit and the. and FHP officers allegedly fabricated evidence and ignored exculpatory evidence (her black dodge had no damage Vs a maroon dodge that eventually was located with significant damage) and she sat in the klink for 2 weeks till no charges and she was set loose. and nearly daily stories of dirty cops accessing the system illegally or at least sans a real investigation to stalk ex’s or their ex’s new boyfriend plates.

But go on about how it’s the savior law enforcement needs.

There is a park near my house. The PD has signs up letting people know it is under video surveillance.

On the surface, this is a good thing as I live in a corner of the city that borders 3 others. Although a very nice park, this was attracting riff raff from neighboring cities to engage in elicit trades and general delinquent behavior. Several fights occurred in the park and the cameras were installed.

All unwelcome activity in the park ceased as soon as the signs appeared. Side note: To date, I have yet to spot them however I've been assured they are there.

I have no problem with the PD having the ability to focus in on the park with cameras if:
- They receive a 911 call for/at the park
- Checking during times when unwelcome activity historically occurs (just after school, events, etc) to see if anything is happening worth note.
- Random checks to assure all is quiet. "let's see if it's nice in the park today <click> hmm few kids playing, guy walking his dog, guy on a bike, youth soccer practice wrapping up.... moving on <click>"

I do have a problem with the cameras using facial recognition to create a data base of every one utilizing that park and building a data base from that information for future use, tracking every vehicle coming and going with time/date stamps, etc.
-

Get the Flock outta here:

Florida to remove license plate readers, such as Flock cameras, from state highways

There are virtually no Flock Safety cameras in New Hampshire. NH State law (RSA 261:75-b) tightly regulates Automated License Plate Readers (ALPRs), mandating data destruction within 3 minutes unless a vehicle is on a "hot list" and explicitly prohibits taking photos of vehicle occupants. Because Flock's cloud-based systems typically retain and share data across broader networks, these statutory restrictions make it extremely difficult for police departments, private businesses, or HOAs to use the Flock Safety anywhere in the state.

Here are some specifics re: NH (RSA 261:75-b) which actively curbs mass surveillance in NH:

Mandated Data Destruction - 3-Minute Purge Requirement: If a Flock camera scans a license plate and the number does not immediately match a law enforcement "hot list" (such as a stolen vehicle or a missing person), the data must be deleted within 3 minutes.

No Occupant Photos: By law, the cameras are strictly barred from being capable of photographing the driver or any passengers inside the vehicle.

State Registration & Audits: Any law enforcement agency operating an ALPR must register the devices with the Department of Safety, submit to strict audit protocols, and deliver annual usage reports.

Further, there's a General Highway Ban: Under NH RSA 236:130, automated surveillance, red-light cameras, and speed cameras are explicitly banned on public highways.

The cameras tracked down the Warm Springs cop killer.

Thanks for all the links. I've compiled a information sheet for my fellow commissioners that will be distributed before our discussion of them at next weeks meeting.

Two more counties near me have recently announced ending their Flock contracts. Some local politicians are actually (finally) recognizing that Flock and the like are, very simply, mass unwarranted surveillance.

another LEO abuse of the system in the name of Pussy......

The fear is we end up with nothing more than rules and regulation on the use of these intrusive systems and not complete removal...

https://x.com/Mrgunsngear/status/2095271076427169795

While these LEO misuses to track an ex are a problem, the real problem can be explained by asking why the Bill of Rights is needed. What is the reason the Founders restrained government?

It wasn't to stop more burglars or prevent white collar embezzlers, was it?

The Founders couldn't have imagined today's technology, but they did know human nature of those with power first hand. The issue isn't whether there are enough laws against cops tracking an ex, nor is it whether fleeing felons can be caught easier. We have to imagine the kind of people in power that led to the 2nd Amendment. And the other amendments in the BoR. Then map those peoples' access to all the surveillance data to see what the real problem is.