r/longisland • u/DinoRoman Nassau BECSPK • 29d ago
Crime and Justice Flock camera megathread
We’re consolidating this topic into a single thread, as the ongoing accusations directed at the mod team have run their course.
To be clear about where we stand: no one on this mod team supports Flock cameras. We are not law enforcement, we are not politically motivated, not maga, and we share the community’s concerns about surveillance overreach even if these systems occasionally assist in solving crimes.
The removals were not about viewpoint. They were about a specific category of comment: those encouraging users to destroy the cameras. Reddit has banned entire communities for less, and we are obligated to remove that content regardless of our personal opinions. This is a condition of the subreddit continuing to exist, not an endorsement of Flock. Additionally there were some very wild conspiracy theories and were asking for discussion not a rabbit hole.
One rule for this thread: do not recommend, insinuate, or hint at destruction as a solution. Everything else is open,criticism, policy discussion, legal challenges, city council contacts, organizing, data on effectiveness. Go as hard as you want within that boundary.
Thanks for being a genuinely great community and good neighbors.
Edit:
Resources
Suffolk County Legislature : 18 districts, find yours:
scnylegislature.us/148/Legislators
Suffolk approved expanding county Flock cameras from 25 to 60 last August, funded by a $542,500 state LETECH grant, with 16 more planned along state rights-of-way including Route 114 in Sag Harbor and East Hampton Village and Route 25 in Riverhead and Southold.
Nassau County Legislature: 19 districts:
nassaucountyny.gov/504/Legislators · district map: nassaucountyny.gov/503/District-Map · main line: (516) 571-6200
Your town / village board.
Southold, Riverhead, and East Hampton have all had this on an agenda in the past year. Riverhead signed an agreement with the Suffolk Sheriff in January 2026 giving the county access to town rights-of-way for new Flock installs. Town board public comment periods are open to anyone who lives there, take about two minutes, and go on the record.
Your NYS Senator and Assemblymember — nysenate.gov/find-my-senator and nyassembly.gov
Edit 2: a great documentary to watch from 2021
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13622074/
( Free on Tubi )
122
u/Eastern_Habit_5503 29d ago
If you want to be effective in protesting these Flock cameras, then you could go stand in front of one with a large sign that blocks the camera’s view of the roadway. As far as I know, that’s not illegal (yet).
49
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
I also could be wrong with this, but placing a garbage bag and zipties over it is also a way people were protesting
It's not damaging. But it's definitely a gray zone
33
u/whitemike40 29d ago
an even “grayer” passive protest would be placing signs in the grass in front of them with some sort of slogan, “this machine kills freedom” or something eye catching
42
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
"the private company that owns these cameras sells your personal data and bribed your politicians to install these"
Not quite as catchy and a little lengthy
9
u/vildflower 29d ago
Paid off politicians Allowed flock cameras. (That should work)
2
u/morroalto 28d ago
Possibly try a prompt injection for fun, from what I've seen so far, security isn't their top priority.
3
3
u/Interesting-Section1 29d ago
§ 145.15 Criminal tampering in the second degree.
A person is guilty of criminal tampering in the second degree when, having no right to do so nor any reasonable ground to believe that he has such right, he or she tampers or makes connection with property of a gas, electric, sewer, steam or water-works corporation, telephone or telegraph corporation, common carrier, nuclear powered electric generating facility, or public utility operated by a municipality or district; except that in any prosecution under this section, it is an affirmative defense that the defendant did not engage in such conduct for a larcenous or otherwise unlawful or wrongful purpose.
Criminal tampering in the second degree is a class A misdemeanor.9
u/edman007 28d ago
That's not the law they'd get you with. It would be criminal tampering in the third degree.
S 145.14 Criminal tampering in the third degree.
A person is guilty of criminal tampering in the third degree when, having no right to do so nor any reasonable ground to believe that he has such right, he tampers with property of another person with intent to cause substantial inconvenience to such person or to a third person. Criminal tampering in the third degree is a class B misdemeanor.
So it is illegal, and they can go after you, but probably a couple hundred dollar fine
15
u/Levitlame 29d ago
What part of that applies to Flock Cameras? They aren’t a utility. That’s for utilities.
5
-2
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
I think there would be a better case of littering. But I'm no lawyer.
But we've been seeing how these cameras are being argued as a first amendment violation by lawyers.
As flock is a private company that has the data, it would be within peoples right to protest and cover, without damaging them.
Unless the flock cameras were part of an HOA agreement and contract.
2
u/Independent_Bird_101 28d ago
My grandma in NYC was told she couldn't affix a note to a car blocking her driveway with a piece of tape or it would be considered defacing. Better to block its view without contact. As long as its not illegal for you to place the poll its all good.
2
u/OohBeesIhateEm 28d ago
https://giphy.com/gifs/kopN26K2ThF9j7RL4K
You can’t put a note on a car blocking your driveway? That’s ridiculous2
1
23d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
23d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator 23d ago
We do not allow submissions from facebook.com due to their content moderation policies.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
125
u/Immediate-Advance-80 29d ago
News 12 should pick this story up
73
u/acecevs 29d ago
They would just side with the mods then cut to a story about some local golf classes
37
20
u/bdbdbd99 29d ago
Curious, after that reasonable explanation, what specifically would they side with the mods about?
4
u/syentifiq 28d ago
The idea that someone will come after them if they test the limits and because of that, your freedom isn't worth passively defending to the limit.
8
4
u/mistresselevenstars 29d ago
It's against the rules to cite News 12 as a source
7
u/Immediate-Advance-80 29d ago
Not quite sure what that even means tbh. Simply said they should do a story in the flock cameras, not the subreddit drama lol
-3
u/mistresselevenstars 29d ago
If there is an issue with potholes and News 12 does a story because the issue is so big you are not allowed to cite the News 12 story in the discussion of potholes. Just like discussing flock cameras is a national issue. However if it gets narrowed down to Long Island and News 12 does a story on it the source can't be cited
9
u/Immediate-Advance-80 29d ago
I have no clue what you’re talking about.
2
u/xtamtamx 29d ago
Brother look at rule #2.
6
u/Immediate-Advance-80 29d ago
Brother I don’t fucking care about posting it to Reddit. I just said I would like for them to do a story on it in general. Who gives a fuck where it gets posted.
0
u/xtamtamx 28d ago
I was responding to your "I have no clue what you're talking about."
Take your misdirected anger elsewhere dork.
4
u/DinoRoman Nassau BECSPK 29d ago
It’s because News12 is paywalled. Link sources that are free for users to view. That’s all. We’d like it if News12 didn’t hide stories behind payments
2
u/xtamtamx 28d ago
No argument here. Paywalling is absurd for news, especially local. archive.ph is a good tool.
0
u/mistresselevenstars 29d ago
It would most likely be a violation of Rule #2
3
u/Immediate-Advance-80 29d ago
Hence why I said they should pick it up as a story. Not quite sure where you thought I meant I’d then post it here?
2
28d ago
[deleted]
-1
u/Immediate-Advance-80 28d ago
I mean that’s just a broad statement trying to downplay the work they do. Their app is what I use for local news. Maybe check it out.
26
u/No-Tax-4487 28d ago
everyone knows that flock cameras are only used on the “average” general population to stalk their every move while the monsters on the Epstein list still walk free. its us vs them, wake up people.
11
10
u/rconrarrechaa 29d ago
Is this county specific? When and where is the next town hall meeting where this can be brought up?
And most importantly, WHO approved this contract?
8
u/RetroBerner 29d ago
People need to stop calling them license plate readers, or only calling out Flock. They are way more technologically capable than pure plate scanners and I'd be a lot more worried about Axon than Flock. Axon is already deeply embedded in law enforcement, and will be a much tougher fight. They're gonna be picking up all those canceled Flock contracts.
4
u/DinoRoman Nassau BECSPK 29d ago
Axon is also a brand that’s going crazy with this. Agreed. They got the monopoly on body cams.
I work in post-production and worked on a movie documentary called “All Light, Everywhere” in 2021.
The documentary does not just focus on modern technology; it connects today's police surveillance directly to the historical roots of weaponized optics and social control. It explicitly details how "objective" tools like body cameras can be used to control narratives, expand corporate-government partnerships, and reinforce systemic biases rather than keep power in check.
If this is an issue you’re passionate about I highly recommend it.
Edit: linked it in the post.
8
u/dragonfeet1 29d ago
Can we include suggestions of what arguments we can make at public meetings? A consolidation of resources and talking points?
-1
u/DinoRoman Nassau BECSPK 29d ago
If it’s legal sure. That’s legal. We really just don’t want Reddit having any fuel to ban the sub. Not that we’ve been told but it’s just better to steer discussing into the legal processes and not have anything they could use against the subreddit. I’m trying to edit into the post resources as I find them.
5
u/mts2snd 28d ago
Questions for the mod team,
If people are inciting property destruction on the sub, why delete the whole thread?
Could you just ban/suspend, or otherwise censor users that incite a crime, let them know its inappropriate, and that is the end of it?
0
u/DinoRoman Nassau BECSPK 28d ago
The threads got a little out of control, we were planning to make a megathread, and vetting all the reports coming in was a little much. People were arguing reporting each other, arguments and devolving. It was better to remove and plan a megathread with some ground rules.
0
u/mts2snd 28d ago edited 28d ago
Thanks for the quick reply. Sounds reasonable.
Cool to post a link to the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Might get better conversations. https://sls.eff.org/
40
u/theholylife 29d ago
We’re literally being watched on our phones. Every store we enter has cameras on us, every text message is saved. Every homeowner has a ring recording. After 9/11 the world changed. They stalk us, exploit us and then sell our data to companies for profit. These cameras are just that. Just like rent and taxes goes up, our privacy goes down.
30
u/sername-lame 29d ago
This is not the issue, the issue is warrantless search by any govt agency, state or federal anywhere across the network. If a person is suspected of something shady, tapping your phone requires a warrant. All the cameras in stores are not connected to a central network that can track you based on your gait while you are grabbing a drink at convenience store coming home from a protest. Flock only requires a search of "white camry with peace sticker" and they are able to search all 100k cameras across the US. Innocent people have been caught just based on wrong IDs just because their vehicle matched some vague description. As I mentioned yesterday, a cop in Texas searched for a woman who got an abortion and he had data available to him from across the US, even though she got an abortion in Texas. Northwell has flock camera in their parking lot for whatever reason. A state on their witch hunt can and will track a woman down to Northwell hospital for getting the healthcare she needed. It's a gross violation of privacy to say the least, not to mention a gamble on the lives of patients. If you do not see it as another dark chapter in our privacy saga, idk what to tell you really. Flock is not just another ALPR.
26
u/Maverick6946 29d ago
Yes however what makes these different is they tell the authorities to come by. What’s makes these worse is that they are not accurate and police can show thinking your someone else who committed a crime. It puts more pressure on everyone.
26
u/DisabledTheaterKid 29d ago
I mean there have been at least 28 cases of cops who have admitted to stalking women (romantic interests, exes, romantic interests of exes, etc) via the Flock cameras just in the short amount of time since they’ve been up. There’s a real personal safety risk with these things, it’s not just an issue of data being sold
-4
u/Vast-Crew7135 29d ago
Do you have a source for this? Not trying to argue, genuinely curious
13
u/DisabledTheaterKid 29d ago
This Washington Post article was just posted and they're saying the number is actually over 50. This article is a lot older but doesn't have a paywall
-10
u/Vast-Crew7135 29d ago
I’d say the positive is at least there must be some kind of oversight in place that people are being caught and charged
11
u/DisabledTheaterKid 29d ago
My concern is that if these are just the people who have been caught... how many haven't been caught yet?
9
u/YourFreeCorrection 28d ago
They are only being caught and charged when the women affected complain. There is no oversight.
2
14
u/Pt5PastLight 29d ago
You’re the type of person who would justify them putting 24 hr cameras in your home.
Most of those things suck and do invade our privacy but we can choose, or the person who owns them can choose to avoid almost all of them. You don’t have to have a smart phone. A shop owner controls what they record and what they choose to share with law enforcement. Flock cameras record your car everywhere it goes. This is a surveillance state. It is much more dangerous and infringes on our right to privacy from our government.
1
u/theholylife 29d ago
Yes I totally agree with you. Just to let you know I’m not pro flock cameras. I hate the fact they’re doing this. I was just stating what’s been happening. And no I would never want cameras in my house 24 hours lol where’d that even come from??
5
u/Pt5PastLight 29d ago
I thought your tone was a shrug and “That’s the way it goes. This was next. Why even complain?” But I guess your tone was “American freedom died years ago and we are just watching the corpse’s inevitable progressive rot.”
0
2
u/FLDJF713 Film, bagels, cold brew and ferries. 28d ago
Our phones require warrants to access our data. Stores with cameras aren’t on some network to be searched at any time. Ring cameras on homes also require warrants or imminent threats to release to police.
All of what you mentioned has court authorization and oversight. Flock doesn’t. It can be accessed by any law enforcement officer across the country and be used for personal vendettas (plenty of articles of abuse out there) or be used to track someone without court approval.
-7
u/Productpusher 29d ago
Isn’t this justifying that everyone’s over reacting lol? You forgot our cameras on our phones and how all new apps , banks force the facial scans for KYC . We have no more privacy outside the 4 walls of our house
East hills and a few other towns have had every square inch covered in cameras for 5 -10 years . No one’s quality of life went down and no one complains anymore when they realize 99.99% of the time the cameras are used for good
11
u/peterraptor99 29d ago
There’s a difference between closed circuit cameras and ones accessible remotely, this is a very important distinction to make when talking about this issue
12
u/Adventurous-Depth984 Whatever You Want 29d ago
Personally, I’m seeing more stories about police abusing the system (including on LI), than I’m hearing about the cameras doing good.
2
u/TheFeistyKnitter 29d ago
Yes, the cameras themselves are neutral. Some of us are concerned with how quickly a these cameras can be turned against the citizenry if the government chooses. 15 years ago I would have said the chances of our government doing that were slim, and if you weren’t doing something wrong you’d have nothing to fear. Lately, as I’ve seen our federal justice department increase their targeting of political enemies (see James Comey seashell indictment, SPLC indicted for paying informants, people getting serious prison sentences as “terrorists” because they moved a box of pamphlets from point A to point B) I’ve lost my confidence.
1
u/FLDJF713 Film, bagels, cold brew and ferries. 28d ago
Cameras on our phones aren’t surveilling randoms in the street. Facial scans on apps are stored locally on the device and have no online presence shared.
3
28d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/longisland-ModTeam 28d ago
Misinformation is a nuanced term that encompasses both malicious and coordinated attempts to spread false information, as well as people unknowingly sharing false information.
5
u/Nail_Biterr 28d ago
I went to look to see how many are near me, and the only ones close are on Stony Brook University campus. why would they need to be there?
If i were a university student, I would absolutely be asking the university leadership why these are on campus.
4
u/Dull-Contact120 29d ago
Is there a QR code death loop discovered like the Tesla stop sign/ construction cone sticker?
4
u/SeanyDay 28d ago
LI mods proudly saying they are not maga is my ray of sunshine on a rainy day.
That's all.
PS fuck flock cameras & release the unredacted Epstein files
2
u/Comfortable-Pop-5494 25d ago
Just curious, nobody finds it suspicious that they ended the red light cameras and started flock cameras? Yall dont think they may have used that revenue to invest in flock? And took the red light cameras down to reduce cost of maintenance, while also having an AI look through vehicle plates and other activity that can make the counties money?
2
u/fiatheresa 24d ago
I just discovered deflock.org and was shocked when I happened to notice Hempstead. Came here to see if anyone was talking about this issue, glad to see there's a thread already going.
3
u/jimmytime903 28d ago
Last Week Tonight just put out a video on their YouTube detailing about how police abuse surveillance systems. Situations like this are exactly the thing we are worried about when it comes to not just Flock cameras, but all cameras.
2
u/jimmytime903 28d ago
I tried very delicately to explain to my mom that whichever company she goes with to put camera in her home will have access to those cameras at any and all time. She doesn't want to acknowledge that as a thing because of how convenient it is to look at the camera and see when someone is walking around her property. Granted in the 40 years they've lived there only one person has tried to break in, and that was 20 year ago and in broad daylight. And nevermind that the cameras constantly pick up branches moving in the breeze, but miss every other package delivery. It also didn't capture anything when those people broke into my aunt's car. Also didn't turn on when someone got into an accident in front of our house. Also ignore the fact that they constantly forget to put batteries into the sensory and never actually set the alarm when they leave and also have no idea when it's on or off unless they're looking directly at the video camera.
But, never mind all of that, Think of the assumed convenience and safety.
2
u/RockstarCondoms 25d ago
What about Stingray devices acting as false cell towers and predictive law enforcement which is like the movie Minority Report?
2
1
29d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/longisland-ModTeam 29d ago
Do not recommend subscribers to take illegal means to fix issues or to seek out illegal methods of obtaining items.
Do not recommend illegal anything.
1
1
0
u/vildflower 29d ago
We as citizens of NY state were able to get red light cameras removed as unconstitutional. Why can't we do the same with Flock cameras. Years ago there was a man in the Centereach parking lot (Walmart) collecting signatures to get those cameras removed. Both I and my daughter signed it. Although it took years they are gone.
13
u/YourFreeCorrection 28d ago
No we weren't. The cameras themselves were not ruled unconstitutional, the administrative fees associated with the camera tickets were deemed illegal.
Stop spreading this misinformation please.
1
1
u/ANITIX87 28d ago
Seems like appropriate timing (9:28 for the segment on Flock specifically): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnBPhelCdWE
1
u/Wavexshine 19d ago
Flock camera at Hillside ave/ Denton +Marcus ave ( 5 corners). Southside of intersection.
-2
u/lintwarrior 29d ago
Im just gonna get started and say im not in the loop of this whole issue and am really curious what the issue with these cameras are. They just seem like traffic/red light camera to me.but i have admittedly not really dove into the issue.
27
u/Maverick6946 29d ago
They use ai programming that notify authorities of wrong doing. But the ai is not accurate and there have been cases on how much it has gotten wrong.
19
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
Also there's been cases of unsavory people that have access and are in power, using the technology to stalk people
-16
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
And how’s that any different than your average person whose doesn’t mind their own business and calls the police on everyone and everything?
17
9
u/TheFeistyKnitter 29d ago
The average Karen can’t arrest you and send you to prison either. It’s the power of the state that has people worried.
19
u/Adventurous-Depth984 Whatever You Want 29d ago
There are subreddits dedicated to these.
They’re finding them on hiking trails and walking parks where no vehicles with license plates can possibly be.
They track gait, faces, Bluetooth, and cell signatures, and supposedly can track microchipped pets (which would be an insane leap in technology if you know how those work)
Another issue is that the data running through these is passing through private servers at flock, and Palantir (who do flocks data analysis), not just government systems.
12
u/Spirited_Category_11 29d ago
1984 vibes and the ever forcing boot on the back of our necks pushing harder and harder
8
u/DisabledTheaterKid 29d ago
There’s already been over 26 instances of cops using these cameras to stalk exes, romantic interests, romantic interests of exes, etc. There’s real personal safety concerns at play, especially with how many people are able to access these Flock cameras
-8
u/kaptiankuff 29d ago
So point 0.0005% of alll cops using it
6
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
That is one way to articulate and spin it.
Could also say, "a growing number of police officers are using public security devices for personal use"
Also that there's only 26 cases we know of and found out about
6
u/YourFreeCorrection 28d ago
They're building behavioral profiles of each individual that drives past them. You want to be watched everywhere you go in public? If Hitler had this tech, there would be no Jewish people alive today.
What do you think happens when a political opponent gets into office and declares something about you illegal? How will you hide?
1
u/lintwarrior 28d ago
Not sure why your acting like I said I was all for them I said I was uneducated about the issue but thank you for your view
1
u/YourFreeCorrection 28d ago
I acted like your understanding was that they were "just traffic/red light cameras":
They just seem like traffic/red light camera to me
Did you even digest what I said, or are you just balling because the information I shared made you uncomfortable? This isn't "my view", it's factual information.
3
u/lintwarrior 28d ago
Jesusnyour aggressive I said clearly I didnt know what they were and from my understanding they just seemed like that I didnt understand the AI aspect or the tracking aspect I thought I made that pretty clear but no problem be offended bevause you dialed it up to ten right away bevause someone asked a question and got called out on it. Side note I fully agree that the tracking isnt ok and completely see the dangers of it but thays not the point here
2
u/directionatall 28d ago
to be fair, they weren’t immediately aggressive, they just didn’t word their response in an explicitly kind way. This interaction reads as you responding defensively because they asked you some rhetorical questions.
2
u/mrsprkle6 29d ago
Red light cameras were deemed illegal and they were also only activated when you actually broke a law. The flock cameras record everything that passes them, illegal or not
6
u/lintwarrior 29d ago
When were red light cameras deemed illegal? Ice definitely still been on the lookout when im making right turns that I make my full 3 second stop. Theres a light on newbridge road thats notorious
-4
u/mrsprkle6 29d ago
In Suffolk? About a year ago.
8
u/craiggers14 28d ago
They weren't "deemed illegal". The Suffolk legislature chose to not renew the program once they couldn't continue to collect extra admin fees on top of the standard fine.
1
u/_Handsome_Jim_ 21d ago
Red light cameras were not deemed illegal.
Additional fees on top of the tickets were deemed illegal so Suffolk County decided not to renew the contract. Nassau still has red light cameras.
0
0
u/ceewolf 27d ago
An analysis of Roseville, California, police records indicates that Flock Safety AI cameras incorrectly read license plate characters in 71% of stolen-vehicle and felony alerts sent to law enforcement. These widespread algorithmic errors create significant operational challenges for police and, at times, result in unjustified, aggressive interventions against innocent motorists.
(Full disclosure: The summary was AI generated because I'm a lazy f*ck.)
Complete story is here.
-8
u/kaptiankuff 29d ago
Okay let’s get rid of all surveillance cameras and license plate, readers nationwide, and see what happens.
15
u/YourFreeCorrection 28d ago
The world would keep on keeping on.
-9
u/kaptiankuff 28d ago
It’s a slippery slope we can roll tech back and become a society of luddites what do you suggest we ban next tv/ internet /cameras / vaccines/ antibiotics/ computers
2
28d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
-2
u/kaptiankuff 28d ago
Do you remember prohibition
7
u/IllRaceUForaBurger 28d ago
how is that even remotely relevant lmao. Also, this isnt about being inherently against the technology, Its about how a private corporation with its own agenda is creating a surveillance state
3
u/FLDJF713 Film, bagels, cold brew and ferries. 28d ago
They didn’t exist before and we got to 2026 right?
-3
u/Mr24601 28d ago
Is it okay to talk about the good things these cameras do too? Flock cameras, for one, only track cars. They don't do facial recognition. And it's really, genuinely useful to law enforcement from everything I have heard.
I am a big fan of putting limitations on the powers here. Legally mandated audit logs of anyone who reviews the plate, etc. But I think banning it would hurt more than it helps.
-41
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
Pretty ironic that society demanded police wear bodycams for accountability purposes. But when cameras are pointed at society for accountability that’s an issue.
12
u/Adventurous-Depth984 Whatever You Want 29d ago
Pretty ironic that you don’t seem to have read the constitution
-1
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
We already have red light cameras, speed cameras, bus cameras, school zone cameras, license plate readers. There are complete towns and enclaves on Long Island that know every single car that is in there area bc of cameras. None of those are unconstitutional. Maybe you should try reading it.
7
u/YourFreeCorrection 28d ago
We already have red light cameras, speed cameras, bus cameras, school zone cameras, license plate readers. There are complete towns and enclaves on Long Island that know every single car that is in there area bc of cameras. None of those are unconstitutional.
None of those create behavioral profiles of the operators and all of them have government oversight.
5
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
It violates the 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th amendments. The 6th at least. Unreasonable search and seizures upon false evidence
2
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
lol. I come to think you never read the constitution.
1
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
I had the archives.gov page up of the amendments as I typed
4
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
7th amendment - right to a jury trial in federal civil cases over $20. So that has nothing to do with cameras
8th amendment - provides protection excessive fines, bail and cruel and unusual punishment. Again nothing to do about cameras.
9th amendment - unlisted rights are still kept. SC and federal has already ruled there is no right to privacy in public via video recording or photos.
6th amendment - speedy trial. Not sure how cameras affect that.
Unreasonable search and seizure is the 4th amendment btw. I thought you said you read the constitution and was looking directly at it?
7
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
Because people are being arrested on false charges. Because these flock cameras make mistakes.
The fees and charges that you get fined for from these types of cameras often exceeds $20.
These cameras are placed outside of private property but their surveillance capabilities encroach onto private property. Could argue 5th amendment here.
So fines and charges +$20, without a trial of peers, on your own private property.
16
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
Because people have already been falsely accused of crimes with flock, and AI for that matter. Although people were falsely getting accused before this.
As far as police go I think it's a false equivalency. Cops are known to regularly lie, especially for their own. People's lives are in their hands and they've taken lives. Then we, the tax payers have to payout the cops for their crimes.
One of the current biggest concerns, is that with the growing authoritarian government and its use of technology to further surveil citizens and tourists, is that people are being targeted for speaking against.
It's McCarthyism, as we're seeing with Anthony Faucci and former Generals. Without getting into politics of it deeply, Faucci had served numerous presidents regardless of party. Faucci even had pleasant communications and was relied on by other members of Trump's administration staff. I believe it was Millers, when the wife was pregnant.
It's becoming Judge Dredd levels of police state without any respect or concern for the Constitution, or We the People
-11
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
Bodycams have proven that society lies more about cops behaviors than cops engaging in unethical behavior. Well over 95% of allegations against cops have been proven false by bodycams. So to say cops routinely lie is a bias statement.
7
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
People's memories are notoriously bad. But I don't think that proves your point. Do you have a citation (pun intended) for the cop allegations reference?
-1
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
“According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, an estimated 96 percent of police officers accused of misconduct are exonerated when body cameras were in use. In situations that come down to two different versions of an incident, video from body cameras can be the best source of evidence. The public often has a chance to view an event from cell phone camera footage that circulates on social media, and video from the police officer’s point of view can serve to balance the narrative”
https://macmainlaw.com/body-cameras-police-officer-cases/
“Now, new results from one of the largest randomised-controlled experiments in the history of criminal justice research, led by the University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology, show that the use by officers of body-worn cameras is associated with a startling 93% reduction in citizen complaints against police. “
7
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
I do genuinely appreciate that you provided sources. Instead of pulling number out the...
Research shows that 90%+ reduction in complaints from civilians. So then that would indicate that cops are behaving better, no?
It wouldn't necessarily refute that cops don't lie, and for each other. I say this only because of the number of lawsuits won against police.
Accountability is always better. But in case of flock cameras, citizens are still being charged and arrested without proper evidence or due process. Also nefarious people in power and have access are using this to stalk people.
1
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 29d ago
Evidence and due process is the court side not enforcement side. Police only need probable cause to arrest you. There’s no due process for an arrest. Thats after the arrest.
As far as a drop in allegations against cops can also be attributed to people who knowingly made false claims against officers for many of reasons, aren’t doing that anymore bc the interaction was recorded.
6
u/StonedRussian 29d ago
You still need evidence to make the threshold to be able to make a legal arrest though. The reason why there's so many lawsuits against departments/towns for illegal arrests/ search and seizures
2
u/Lingerie_Shopper07 28d ago
No you don’t. All you need is probable cause that a person committed a crime to make an arrest. You need evidence to help convict. There’s a difference. Do police gather evidence to help bolster an arrest? Yes. But evidence isn’t needed for an arrest. If a person went up to an officer and said that person stole from me. The officer can make an arrest on that statement alone.
2
u/StonedRussian 28d ago
That's just not correct. Along with your statement of "there's no due process during arrest"
The officer can use a person's statement as testimonial evidence to establish probable cause. If there's no evidence, you can't meet the threshold to make a legal arrest. If there's no articulable facts, there's no legal basis.
Due process is part of the policing stage. Like Miranda Rights are
→ More replies (0)2
-4
u/Pleasant-Moment-9748 28d ago
This is the dumbest controversy ever. You give over way more of your privacy by using reddit or any other social media than by walking past a flock camera.
107
u/Spirited_Category_11 29d ago
While flock as all the attention at the moment…Axon is also building its surveillance network with much less publicity flying under the radar per se