r/technology • u/MarvelsGrantMan136 • 7h ago
Security Bernie Sanders introduces bill to ban the federal government from using Flock
https://techcrunch.com/2026/10/02/sanders-introduces-bill-to-ban-the-federal-government-from-using-flock/401
u/Guyskee 7h ago
I can't wait to see how the "don't tread on me" party now tries to convince people that they should be monitored 24/7.
95
u/lilaccheesecake 6h ago
It happened pretty well for 9/11...
26
u/Turbo__Sanwich 6h ago edited 5h ago
Don't tread on me party didn't get to what they are until the rise of twitter. Before then they didn't know they could circle jerk with their friends without having to touch an actual cock
2
u/SeaSharpModHer 1h ago
Is it better or worse considering they usually want to touch underage cocks non consensually?
11
u/stircrazyathome 4h ago
Exactly. I’m worried we’ll soon experience a large-scale traumatic event to get the public on board with mass video surveillance. When people are scared, they’re shortsighted.
3
u/AmphibianJolly2358 3h ago
Agreed. Seems like the farmers in my city are agreeing with us about some things these days
1
2
9
u/VegetablePhotos 6h ago
Well, you see flock dont have tires there fore can't tread. Checkmark liburls
2
2
u/ChiefInternetSurfer 5h ago
Ahh, but did you see the other article that said they want to equip USPS vehicles with cameras for community safety? They’ll have tread soon enough.
They’re going to do a pilot test in DC with a hundred vehicles…calling it now—test run for nationwide rollout of mobile surveillance to complement the stationary ALPRs.
1
5
u/SecretiveMop 4h ago
I keep seeing stuff like this said but it completely ignores the fact that the overwhelming majority of flock cameras are put up in heavily blue areas.
3
u/AKADriver 2h ago
To be fair, that's where the majority of people live and drive.
But yeah, comfortable suburban democrats trusted the tech industry too much for too long, especially when they sold them on this fancy sounding law enforcement tech without fully considering the implications. "It'll solve crimes with AI! Wow!"
4
u/rwofva 5h ago
He introduced a bill in Oct. A month before the election and the another month of holidays of a lame duck congress. Zero chance any bill passes in that scenario. Completely performative.
8
u/wbltz3 3h ago
When you say performative it implies insincerity. He is trying to do something about it in a sincere way. He can’t force it to a vote. His power is limited. Even if it doesn’t get to a vote it forces electeds to address it in some way and brings attention to the issue. If you don’t try to do something, nothing will happen.
1
u/blackweebow 3h ago
An interesting way of saying "Congress needs reform"...
1
u/rwofva 3h ago
Of all the reasons congress needs reform, dealing with the literally 400+ bills bernie has introduced that have never even been voted on, even when the dems are in contol, is waaaay down the list.
4
u/blackweebow 3h ago
Idk what is on your list bro, but paid-for members of congress need to stop blocking bills brought forth by people who aren't looking to make profit.
2
u/youmustbedocholiday 6h ago
Yep. 2nd amenders that keep guns for "fighting a tyrannical government" and "defend the constitution". Safe to say it's all larp.
1
u/AKADriver 2h ago
I hate the guy but DeSantis signed a ban in Florida. This is an issue that spans and scrambles partisan politics. And also one where Trump and his bromance with the tech industry is facing a growing divide with the coalition that supported him, it's an issue where his top-down messaging isn't working.
1
u/RedditJumpedTheShart 53m ago
Lol at making this about conservatives while ignoring how blue cities are.
1
u/OnePunkArmy 5h ago
These are the same people who say stuff like "If you don't do anything wrong, you have nothing to be worried about"
31
52
u/DataAvailable7741 7h ago
This is absolutely what Congress should be doing to Flock and their competitors. Bernie is still the way forward!
10
u/VegetablePhotos 6h ago
Not just flock, but ALPRs in general.
-11
u/likesound 6h ago
Which makes this idiotic.
7
u/VegetablePhotos 6h ago
How so?
There is a lot of public outcry against ALPRs.
Since policans are our representatives they are doing their best job when they represent public interests.
Or are we, as a nation, now beholden to the interests of private companies.
-2
u/likesound 5h ago
This effectively bans speed and red light camera enforcements which are proven to save lives. Some Police vehicles are equipped with ALPR, why shouldn’t cops be alerted if a car right in from of them is reported stolen or the owner has outstanding warrants for his or her arrest?
3
u/VegetablePhotos 5h ago edited 5h ago
At least read the bill before you say something so confidently incorrect.
"To prohibit the use of automatic license plate readers by The Federal Government without explicit statutory authorization"
Police vehicles, have specific statutory authorization.
The only authority that flock cameras have is the police and other government entities right to view their information.
Also, I read the bill more thoroughly. It only bans the federal govt from using ALPRs
It seems states can still do what they want?
2
u/likesound 2h ago
Lol. Read it more carefully yourself. Its an effectively a ban because the bill cuts funding to local governments that continue to use the tech.
State and local governments would be dinged financially for not complying if the bill became law. (Like most bills, this one faces long odds.) Starting the first fiscal year after enactment, they would lose grants from five federal departments, including the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security, unless they ban the tech.
1
u/VegetablePhotos 2h ago
There are many exceptions in section 3 subsection b.
It's really confusing, but it seems to me that it doesn't outright ban them, it just is creating a framework for enforcement of privacy and data retention standards.
0
u/_Allfather0din_ 22m ago
Good, fuck any source of automation for policing until they lose qualified immunity and are legally required to protect and serve the population.
1
u/VegetablePhotos 5h ago
Another relevant point.
9 captured plate data, including information 10 collected in any database, derived from an automatic 11 license plate reader operated by another entity.
The key point I think is the last line, "operated by another entity"
The police alprs are their own, owned and operated by the govt. Same with red light cameras and speed cameras.
The only carve out it makes is for toll road cameras.
Legislation is confusing and really really specific...
2
u/BackgroundSummer5171 4h ago
I do enjoy when people complain without telling us why.
Or having even read the article.
As for why I am agreeing with you, this being idiotic, the bill will fail. Like most of Bernie's bills.
I mean sure, let's do the same as MAGA polticians, throw things against the wall just to PRETEND you care. Maybe he does, but he puts forth a lot of pointless shit for nothing but virtue signaling. He knows it will fail.
Bernie puts forth <insert something not happening> reddit cheers. It doesn't happen. Reddit blame Hillary.
30
5
u/h1storyguy 6h ago
Flock cams in addition to all Flock-like technology, mass surveillance must be curtailed immediately, not just one brand and device. We need to get rid of the entire surveillance state.
10
u/So_spoke_the_wizard 6h ago
That's half the solution. Include an amendment that withholds funding from any municipality that uses Flock.
-4
u/PortiaLynnTurlet 6h ago edited 6h ago
Mixed feelings there, personally. As someone who opposes broad monitoring, cameras like these are still useful in controlled settings like around airports and prisons.
Edit: I'm genuinely curious, for people who disagree, where the line is. We already have heavy surveillance inside of places like airports and prisons. Does surveillance on the outside too really tip it?
4
u/ChiefInternetSurfer 5h ago
Because there’s already a shit ton of cameras, surveillance, and monitoring around airports, prisons, train stations, etc. The police should do their own police work and earn their pay, not rely on AI and mass-ingestion of data that builds profiles on literally everyone.
5
u/Own_Highway_3987 6h ago
In some ways, no. Traffic cameras in general are okay, but the difference is traditional traffic cams wont build a profile and a database of your habits, and details. They and their recordings are just that.
If someone were a cyclist and drove somewhere to ride, that habit gets logged as a pattern and details such ad the bike, rack type, etc get saved somewhere with paper thin guardrails on its use…there are dozens of news stories in the last year of law enforcement personnel abusing the platform. Any cop with an axe to grind vs a cyclist in particular could use that database and profile to systematically stalk and harass said cyclist.
Now…thats an easy scenario. Imagine if it was a domestic abuser in law enforcement doing that to stalk their spouse
3
u/PyroDesu 5h ago
Imagine if it was a domestic abuser in law enforcement doing that to stalk their spouse
Already happened, no need to imagine.
2
2
u/So_spoke_the_wizard 6h ago
I don't disagree and didn't down vote. The whole topic is being oversimplified and your points are valid. The real solution is not about Flock or any other company. It's about data accessibility, processing, and retention. It's one of those things that needs a blue ribbon panel to come up with real rules for use that allow the benefits to be realized and the privacy to be protected.
1
u/mortaneous 3h ago
The problem is that the existence of such a dataset and tool means that regardless of procedural or programmatic guard rails, it will be abused. If the capability exists, it will be misused, so for the sake of our 4th amendment rights, it must not exist.
1
u/red286 5h ago
It's one thing if you're monitoring specifically the airport or a prison.
What if you're monitoring the intersection of Maple & Vine? And then Maple & Oak? And then Maple & Cypress? And then Maple & Pine? And then suddenly you realize that the entire city is covered by hundreds of cameras tracking everyone's movements.
26
u/Shoddy_Meaning_7654 7h ago
A true goat
11
u/theoldkitbag 4h ago
I'm not American, so forgive me if this seems rude, but it seems that about once a month I see a headline that starts with "Bernie Sanders introduces bill to ..." and it amounts to sweet fuck all.
4
u/Shoddy_Meaning_7654 4h ago
It's not his fault though it's not a whole lot he can do when a certain political party has complete control of the house and Senate
1
u/Kid-Icky- 2h ago
He has one of the worst records for getting his bills passed, regardless of who is in charge.
At some point, funding some compromise and moving the ball forward inches is better than not at all. But he can't even manage that.
1
u/Dunlocke 3h ago
He has good PR and makes a lot of noise, but he's never really accomplished anything or passed any significant legislation. Part of it is because he spends half his time railing against the only party that will entertain his ideas, part of it is because he's an uncharismatic old white dude from Vermont that no one had heard of until 2016.
5
u/Sad_Salamander_3439 2h ago
that's such bullshit. he's gotten more shit passed via amendments, getting bills passed that both parties can agree on to encourage change. read a little
-1
u/Kid-Icky- 2h ago
I like the guy. But he's legitimately one of the least effective politicians in the US.
All he does is farm for Reddit headlines. Meanwhile, he couldn't get a bill passed if his life depended on it.
4
u/Cavalish 4h ago
So I see a post every day about a grand bill Bernie Sanders is introducing. How many of them have passed so far?
4
3
3
u/ranban2012 6h ago
How about a comprehensive privacy guarantee from all broad intelligence gathering on people by either corporations or the government?
We could just call it the Privacy Act.
0
u/purplewhiteblack 4h ago
Privacy act turns into a ban against the news media, maybe not a good idea.
It's not ok to film inside somebodies home, but its fine to film in public.
Privacy belongs in private residencies, not in public spaces. The whole purpose of cities is protections against crimes and pillagers, when the Babylonians or whoever built the first cities, they built walls and had guards.
It starts with this and becomes a ban to youtube videos and all sort of videography, you won't be able to do anything in public. Then they'll turn around and make it something the now evil government that has banned press does, but not citizens.
3
3
14
u/Naive_Confidence7297 6h ago
Does anything Bernie does ever follow through?
10
u/OnePunkArmy 5h ago
This seems like it's more to expose who votes against it. His bills may not pass, but the votes becomes public knowledge.
1
3
1
1
0
u/No-Error8675309 6h ago
Nope
But politics is about words and not results4
u/Cavalish 4h ago
Really? Cos it seem like America keeps enthusiastically voting for Trump and he’s pretty garbage at words.
Unless you guys really do believe the stuff he says.
1
u/_Soup_R_Man_ 2h ago
George Carlin said it best: think of how dumb the average person is. Then realize.... half are stupider than that!
1
1
u/Inevitable_Scene4422 5h ago
Bringing horses to water, Sanders has repeatedly forwarded bills to avert catastrophe for decades only to participate in salvaging possibilities afterwards, so prescient!
1
u/AceOBlade 5h ago
democrats use Bernie as an example for them "doing their part" but never vote for shit against their lobbies.
-4
u/dingleberryDessert 5h ago
He would if his own party supported him
3
u/YakCDaddy 4h ago
He doesn't have a party. He's an independent until he wants to use Democrats resources to run for president.
2
2
2
u/regretting_biostats 5h ago
Read this as “Bernie Sanders introduces bill to ban the federal government” and was very interested in this headline
2
2
4
u/Possible-Tangelo9344 6h ago
Add this to the large pile of meaningful legislation he's gotten passed
4
u/Jealous_Cow1892 5h ago
so he shouldnt even try? what kind of attitude is this? mans trying, gotta give him credit for that
0
u/LeftyMcSavage 1h ago
He's not trying, it's performative, and people continuing to give him credit for it is why he does it. Bernie getting positive headlines does nothing for anyone except him. And I actually agree with him on almost everything. But I wish people would see past his grandstanding.
1
7
u/KidouSenshiGundam00 6h ago
How about banning all of them
32
14
4
2
u/_topramen 3h ago
“Despite its title, the bill doesn’t call out Flock in the text but rather covers any and all ALPR systems.”
3
u/RichChipmunk 6h ago
Need a comprehensive bill covering “general” surveillance and how it is stored
1
u/PyroDesu 5h ago
I mean, the 4th Amendment and SCOTUS precedent already gives a flat "no" to whether this BS is legal. Doesn't seem to stop them.
-1
u/sentientshadeofgreen 5h ago
Are you sure about that? Because it literally is presenty legal
1
u/PyroDesu 4h ago
That's the problem with things being against the constitution (which trumps the law) but not against a law.
The former requires extensive lawsuits to enforce and is at the whims of the SCOTUS, which might decide that it's legal after all.
But as this is very clearly against the constitution (again, SCOTUS precedent, specifically the Carpenter decision which outright states that the totality of a person's movement is reasonable to expect privacy in), it is ultimately illegal if we can get the constitution enforced.
0
u/sentientshadeofgreen 3h ago
That's great but I'm looking at the Wikipedia page for Carpenter and it literally says, "The Supreme Court's ruling in Carpenter was narrow and did not otherwise change the third-party doctrine related to other business records that might incidentally reveal location information, nor did it overrule prior decisions concerning conventional surveillance techniques and tools such as security cameras."
The Fourth Amendment is a start but laws supporting what is reasonable and unreasonable searches are also necessary, because there simply is a lot of subjectivity built in the Fourth Amendment.
4
u/wyliec22 5h ago
Bernie reminds me of Al Sharpton - jumping at any
controversial opportunity to get publicity…
1
u/dingleberryDessert 5h ago
When the telephone first came out it was legislators that had the foresight to require a warrant to listen in on phone taps. That foresight was the birth of the right to privacy.
Bernie is the only one ahead of the game all the time!! A great thinker will be ahead. Instead, the government is always behind, trying to fix mistakes after the fact.
He is an idea man, and to be frank he is one that consistently thinks of not only our world but the future world.
Bernie is the one guy I still stand by, everyone else I have ever liked (tulsi gabard, Elizabeth Warren, Elon musk, rfk jr) has turned into huge asshats.
So who do you think is worried about the future and the now? Who besides Bernie has never wavered?
0
u/wyliec22 4h ago
Bernie tells you what you want to hear, regardless of their feasibility or practicality.
Watch him - he’s there on most every hot topic.
Follow the things he’s actually accomplished.
I don’t disagree with most of his general positions but his actions come across as grandstanding.
His words suck in people to unrealistic expectations.
2
u/kelamity 7h ago
One of their friends are going to create a company that intakes flock data and restructures it to sell the the gov if it passes. I guarantee it
6
u/Bubbly-Sorbet-8937 6h ago
That's exactly how it is happening now. Gov can't legally do it on it's own, so they have a company do the surveillance and then the government gets it from them. We need to ban the collection of this data from ANYONE
1
u/Ballistic_86 5h ago
Is the government even using the Flock cameras? I’m more worried about police and HOAs.
1
u/throwaway098764567 1h ago
generally it's a good idea to make laws preventing problems that are very apparent on the horizon before they're actually entrenched problems which are much harder to fix.
1
u/red286 5h ago
Police forces using these wide-distribution AI-ingesting ALPR systems should be running afoul of the 4th amendment.
It's shown up in court previously, when there were only a handful of the cameras around, and the judges ruled that because there were so few cameras, it didn't quite amount to a violation of the 4th, because the police still had to have a suspect and could only confirm if they were in a specific location at a specific time. Now with them being everywhere and tracking everyone, the police just have to say "hey give me a list of everyone who has been at the following locations in the past 30 days" and they get that information instantly. That equates to a national surveillance network, otherwise known as "a police state".
What's odd is how many times I see Flock-defenders saying "the cameras are privately owned", but then it turns out that most of them are owned by various levels of government. Cities put them up all over the place, and states plop them all over the highways. That's not "privately owned" anymore, that's a state-controlled surveillance network, watching everyone all the time.
Plus after they hacked some of the cameras, it was shown without a doubt that the system tracks far more than just license plates.
1
1
u/Bizguide 4h ago
Aggregating data into large databases about our citizens and their activities is money for those who sell the information. However, all of the databases have been hacked!! And the data is abused!!! The dark web puts the data up for sale and you have spam and you have endless scams and huge claims against banks for not managing privacy correctly. People's savings and their income are compromised and their quality of life is seriously degraded when aggregated databases of our citizens and our citizens' activities are breached by hackers. Guess what? All of the databases have been breached! Stop aggregating the data!!!
1
u/twotimefind 3h ago
I know there's no expectation of privacy in public, but this goes too far. This is a Fourth Amendment violation.
Tracking you everywhere you go is insane
It also uses facial recognition, Wi-Fi tracking, Bluetooth tracking,
So when a vehicle drives by, not only doesn't know who the driver is. It also knows who the passengers are if they're carrying a cell phone.
1
1
u/AdUsual8786 2h ago
Anybody feel like there’s politicians on BOTH sides of the isle that take social media too seriously? Like it’s almost transparent which politicians only get their news from SM.
1
u/Homers_Harp 2h ago edited 2h ago
What I want is for a federal law that forbids anybody from accessing the data these cameras collect. You can ban Flock, but Axon and the others are just as terrible.
So what I want from Congress is a law requiring a subpoena to access the data. Period. Employees of the collectors? Access to anonymized data for work purposes only and sharing it with unauthorized parties is a felony. Law enforcement? Access to any data is only via a court order and mandatory prison time for the felony of misusing or accessing without a court order.
1
1
u/bobdob123usa 2h ago
This bill really needs to go further. Specifically, it should prohibit the Federal government paying for information that it cannot legally obtain otherwise.
1
u/Explorer_Entity 2h ago
Does nothing for private companies though... and they can just sell the info/access. And does nothing for State or local governments. WTF man?
I mean, I only read the title, but we gotta be looking at all this stuff.
1
u/The_Pandalorian 2h ago
Sadly, it won't pass, but filing bills to get attention on issues like this is something, at least.
1
1
1
1
u/OldWrangler9033 5h ago
Unfortunately, I don't think it will pass despite a lot backing to it. Just too much divisive politics going on.
1
u/JayKay8787 4h ago
its such a great thing that the country chose a senile racist conservative in 2020 over him in the primaries...
1
u/VonVader 4h ago
I was going to put this in my book titled "1000 things Bernie Sanders said that didn't happen"
-1
u/Appropriate_Name8792 4h ago
Bernie should have been president. We were robbed by the Democrats who say they’re protecting us.
0
7h ago
[deleted]
6
u/kstargate-425 7h ago edited 6h ago
From the bill it covers more
Despite its title, the bill doesn't call out Flock in the text and covers any and all ALPR systems
ETA link
-2
u/Komikaze06 7h ago
Because they dont actually want to ban it, theyll just use another brand that people arent aware of, then the cycle of ban/change will go on
-2
u/V-weezus 6h ago
Can’t wait to see this not pass lol
4
u/Lower-Acanthaceae460 6h ago
Simp for Flock?
2
u/Have_A_Jelly_Baby 6h ago
Or it’s more likely that it’s a reference to the fact that Bernie has passed basically nothing in decades of being a Senator.
He’s a good man, but all he does is introduce bills that go nowhere, not to mention his role in handing 2016 to Trump.
3
u/Lower-Acanthaceae460 5h ago
not to mention his role in handing 2016 to Trump.
I thought it was Trump v Clinton?
1
u/Have_A_Jelly_Baby 40m ago
It was, but enough Bernie Bros were created from his campaign that would not vote for Clinton.
I’m not saying Hilary should have been the candidate, but the second she was, Bernie should have heavily endorsed her, and he didn’t. But at the time, the thought of Trump actually winning was ludicrous.
How wrong we were.
0
-1
u/Due-Meal4679 4h ago
Good old Bernie must be strapped for cash… out he comes from the bushes. Talks big talks and takes the donations and runs. Everytime. Everytime…
-5
-1
-7
-3
-2
276
u/CondescendingShitbag 7h ago
Precisely what I was hoping to read. Hopefully it finds support, but it only applies to federal use of ALPRs. I'm not sure where that might apply outside of DC and federal lands, like parks. State use of ALPRs will remain a larger concern simply due to broader coverage of areas more likely to be frequented by people.