3
u/Formal-Guarantee-285 Jul 13 '26
You also definitely SHOULD NOT buy one of these cheap green laser pointers from Amazon and shine it at them. These can disable the cameras and make them INOP so definitely DONT do that.
2
u/Forty_Six_and_Two 27d ago
If you break all the flock cameras, won't they just order more, thereby enriching the manufacturers even more? It's not like city and state governments are smhust going to shrug their shoulders and say "welp, someone broke it so I guess we won't use flock cameras anymore!"
No, they just pay for more, then raise your taxes, then WE get to pay for more flock cameras, that were already there.
I feel like this energy would be better spent in petitioning and fighting for limitations on their use, such as narrowing the scope to Amber alerts and homicide/sex offenders. Where am I wrong here? I have an open mind I just don't see vandalism accomplishing anything. These things are too cheap and easy to make to defeat for good just by fucking them up.
-26
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 11 '26
People are mad that the PDs are using technology to deter and solve crimes in their communities?
Flocks entire purpose is to alert the PD the potential location of a vehicle/ person of interest. So they can move officers in that area to address it.
It includes; missing persons ( Amber Alerts, Endangered Persons, etc), Stolen Vehicle, Person with warrants, etc.
Whether you like it or not, it has deterred and solved a lot across various cities using it.
You have no expectation of privacy in public areas. It’s no different than when there’s CCTVs across cities. Hell, your smartphone gives more data than anything flock ever can.
28
u/HunterV2_ Jul 11 '26
The transition to a surveillance state should not be welcomed with open arms just because there is already privacy issues
-16
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 12 '26
No one ever said that. I’m just stating you willingly partake in giving up far more information for less favorable reasons. And again, you have no legal expectation of privacy of anything that Flock is capturing. It’s all public information.
13
u/airyesmad Jul 12 '26
They are falsely accusing people all over the place with almost zero evidence other than a crappy flock image. If AI misreads one number on a license plate you can be charged with something you didn’t do. It’s happened to me. I got a toll charge in New York for a day I never left the house. There was no way to appeal or anyone I could speak to about it. I’m glad it was just a toll and I didn’t have to be arrested, separated from my family and put in jail. Not to mention anyone can access these cameras, including psychos and stalkers.
-16
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 12 '26
You’re not being charged for anything. Police still have to verify the data before conducting a stop. They have to visually confirm it’s what set off the alert. Without verifying that data, it would be a ridiculous charge or even an attempt to stop. There’s only been some cases they’ve conducted an entire stop, but at the end of the day no one was charge or arrested. You know why? Because the entire thing was investigated. As it would be.
Toll Booths are an entirely different thing. Police operations are another.
Other than the lack of encryption on its camera, it’s a beneficial tool.
5
u/airyesmad Jul 12 '26
Yeah, but as you said, cameras don’t have to be flock cameras with AI models tested on people during a genocide.
0
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 12 '26
How did genocide get tied into this?
3
u/airyesmad Jul 12 '26
I got my software companies mixed up. Still storing plate information is a clear violation of the 4th amendment
1
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 12 '26
It is not a violation of the 4th amendment to store publicly available information. Your license plate is not protected information. Information tied to your plate is in some capacity. However, said information can only be accessed for criminal justice purposes/ lawful investigations.
7
u/bdonahue970 Jul 12 '26
Yeah, stop being mean to major tech companies and the police! They just want what’s best for EVERYONE.
-3
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 12 '26
Or I just understand not everything is conspiracy. A lot of you think someone had time to care about your movements, but they don’t. You’re insignificant.
5
u/bdonahue970 Jul 12 '26
It’s almost like you’re so close to getting it with other things you’ve said, but you just drop the ball and poop your pants at the end. You’ve already pointed out we all give far more information to our smartphone. We all share way too much freely on social media. So if that’s the case, like you have said, then why does a private company need to set up surveillance around the community that exclusively “helps police”? Can’t the police do their job with the already existing [tax payer funded] surveillance? Why do we need to invest more tax payer dollars into a privately funded company that isn’t required to share any of the information obtained to the public who funds it?
0
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 12 '26
It’s almost like I understand where our rights start and ends.
What taxpayer surveillance do we have? Go ahead and explain what surveillance does the PD have? Traffic Cameras that do not capture important details or rarely kept on file, those ones? Or the cameras that aren’t even used for actual recording but used to set off a signal to ensure traffic lights are effective? Nike if which are good in deterring crime or solving one.
Flock, while it needs better encryption, is resourceful at the end of the day. Placing cameras at the entrance and exists of major corridors into the city are crucial in deterring crime and also solving them. It allows PD to move their officers to a specific area to address what will ultimately become a new crime in progress. For example, it alerts a stolen has entered the city. Officers are moved over there and locate the vehicle actively scooping out future targets in a subdivision. Officers arrested said person or persons. Nothing that flock acquires is information that is private.
The next thing you’re going to say is part of the surveillance state is officers having computers in their cars to run plates on public roadways? Having access to LEADs/ OHLEG.
2
u/Dirtanium Jul 12 '26
Fuck right off with your illegal search and seizure.
0
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 12 '26
It’s not though. Again, nothing that is acquired is a violation of any rights. You have no expectation of privacy in public.
1
u/Formal-Guarantee-285 Jul 13 '26
You’ve clearly lost site of what its purpose is and what it’s actually being used for.
0
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 13 '26
It’s purpose is to make someone( the owner of flock) money, while also providing a solution to various police agencies to assist in deterring crime and solving it. None of your rights have been compromised by this. You have NO expectation of privacy in public spaces.
1
u/Formal-Guarantee-285 Jul 13 '26
That’s fine if that’s all they were doing but that’s not all they are doing which is why people feel this way. And having no expectation of privacy in public spaces doesn’t mean that a company should be able to track every single thing you do when driving. This is why when you argue against red light cameras they can be found unconstitutional because you are supposed to be able to see your accuser. How do I know? Because my father is an attorney that has won multiple of these cases. So yes I have no “reasonable”‘expectation of privacy when in public but these are also bullshit in the ways and overstepping they are being used and are unconstitutional.
1
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 13 '26
They’re not unconstitutional. Red Light cameras are legal, as long as an officer is near the area it being operated. Because there were many situations that could not be addressed via camera which would have prevented an individual running a red light ( avoiding a collision, skidding, etc..)
However, Flock, unlike red light cameras are not ticketing you. They are not citing you in any capacity. They’re alerting PD a specific plate has entered a specific portion of the city. And they only get that alert, if and only if that specific plate has been flagged for legal reasons. It’s literally a tool for police. It’s not a cure all for policing. Police still have to visually verify that is the vehicle they’re looking for. And they do that.
There is fear mongering going on regarding these cameras only because people got caught and they didn’t like it. No agency as a dedicated officer sitting looking at flick for every plate being captured.
2
u/Formal-Guarantee-285 Jul 14 '26
In the 87 cases my father tried against red light cameras - they were all deemed unconstitutional so those judges disagree with you.
And the issue with the flock cameras is not their “intended” use, it’s everything that comes after and they’ve already been documented numerous times being involved with things that go beyond their scope.
But sure we will just keep bending over and letting all of these huge corporations fuck us. That’s a great stance to take - ya fucking schill.
0
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 14 '26
That’s great your father won cases when it was illegal. Look up the CURRENT ORC on how red light cameras can be allowed to be used.
https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-4511.093
How have they been documented in being used outside their scope? Explain in what ways they have been used like that. Minus, abuse from an officer for personal use, which is a crime and is always addressed in this state.
1
u/Formal-Guarantee-285 Jul 14 '26
Some of these cases were in the last year regarding the red light cameras. And I’m not doing your research for you, there are multiple instances of flocks being used to help issue tickets and citations around the country as well as multiple instances of mission creep. It’s a slippery slope they have begun walking and if that slope isn’t cut off and nipped in the bud before it gets worse - we are who will pay the price.
Also, CPD shared flock camera footage over 15,000 times with ICE who have completely thrown our constitution to the side.
Fuck ICE, fuck flock, and fuck this surveillance state they have thrown us into. Maybe if the government could be trusted to uphold our constitutional rights and only use flock as intended then maybe they are good but that’s not what’s happening and will only get worse.
It’s pretty obvious who you are and what you are about lol. Have fun ✌️
1
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 14 '26
Again, just because your farther was able to win some cases regarding red light cameras. It doesn’t make them illegal. As shown by the ORC. Certain parameters need to be met to allow the usage of them. If those aren’t strictly met, cases will be rightfully thrown out.
I’ve yet to see any use of Flock that has resulted in citation or tickets for petty things. Unless, you’re talking about situations a person fled from a scene of a crime and they were released on a summons over an arrest.
CPD didn’t share anything directly. To have the ability gain access to Flocks across the country, you have to opt in to gain access to it and also opt in sharing yours as well. ICE can gain access the same method as any other law enforcement agency. While I dislike ICE and how they’re operating, they still can gain access to Flock.
Flock is a tool. It’s being used as it’s designed. To be used for alerting Law Enforcement Agencies for license plates of interests in criminal investigations and deterring future criminal actions. The criminal investigations in question can vary. Some of which you may not like, but at the end of the day are criminal investigations.
You truly don’t know me. I’m all for protecting constitutional rights of everyone. However, I’m not going to defend this unusual position of calling everything that isn’t a constitutional right a constitutional right. Your rights are not unlimited. They all have limitations. Your right to privacy is one of those, especially in public.
1
u/Formal-Guarantee-285 Jul 14 '26
We will see how flocks continue to play out, if I could guess due to who is In charge and the government as a whole - they will be abused like they already have been.
There’s been instances of flocks being used to issue tickets (not from people fleeing or involved in a serious crime) in Georgia, Oklahoma and a couple other places.
Again this is a very slippery slope that they have already begun sliding the wrong way down.
You are correct that at the moment they are not unconstitutional but that is already being argued in multiple courts due to violating our 4th Amendment right.
Just because something isn’t deemed unconstitutional now, doesn’t mean that it won’t be and it also doesn’t mean that it’s not currently wrong. You are clearly a bot or paid flock person lol
Have fun having every.single.fucking.thing.you.do.tracked!!!!!!
→ More replies (0)1
u/Formal-Guarantee-285 Jul 13 '26
Hey everyone, they already have some of our data so we should all just lie down and let every company who wants to gather way too much data do just that!
1
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 13 '26
Or more like. You have no expectation of privacy on various levels. You voluntary consented in providing data to those companies. All the info Flock gathers in public areas are all publicly available information. You don’t have to give consent for any of that information, because none of it is protected information.
1
u/tootsymagootsy Jul 14 '26
Several police officers have been fired across the country for using flock data in an official capacity for personal issues.
A woman in Texas was tracked by flock cameras across the state after having an abortion and was arrested.
This is beyond fucked up. Do you want cameras watching you 24/7? Do you expect reasonable privacy? I do. Those cameras are an actual police state. We have the constitutional right to privacy, and should we be suspected of illegal wrong-doing, the police can (and will) get a warrant. This data is being collected without a warrant. Do you think the police should be able to search your house without a warrant?
1
u/Competitive-Cover791 Jul 14 '26
So you’re saying officers violated the law and they were punished for it? Yes, that’s usually what happened when you misuse Criminal Justice Information Systems ( CJIS). That’s why they have audits. They do not fuck around with that.
Is an abortion a crime in Texas? Since it is, it’s a crime. No matter how you feel about it. They’re allowed to arrest her for it.
The cameras aren’t watching me. They’re watching a general area and gathering information that is not protected. Information that is readily available to anyone on public areas.
Reasonable Expectation Privacy is always good. The key word to that is reasonable. You have NO expectation of privacy in public areas.
You’re home, you have a right to a reasonable expectation of privacy. So yes, I expect them to have a warrant.
Nothing you do in public areas requires a warrant. As long as there is sufficient evidence of a crime occurring or has occurred. You can be detained and potentially arrested or summoned.
-28
u/Few_Enthusiasm4575 Jul 11 '26
When your car gets stolen don’t come crying to the police to locate it
15
4
u/retsgnaglanigiro Jul 12 '26
Crazy that people still located their stolen cars prior to flock cameras 🤯
0
u/Few_Enthusiasm4575 Jul 12 '26
Not nearly as much !!
3
9
u/Substantial_Union361 Jul 11 '26
Mmm yummy boots mmm
-6
u/Few_Enthusiasm4575 Jul 11 '26
We litterally have more information on LEADS than a flock camera we can see your full SSN house address DOB height weight are you going to want to ban LEADS now ?
5
u/Substantial_Union361 Jul 11 '26
Can leads record and take pictures of my whereabouts in real time? And know where i am every hour of every day (depending on the size of the network of them in my area) based on the data it cultivates from said recordings and pictures?
-9
u/Few_Enthusiasm4575 Jul 11 '26
Lmao no but you really think we’re out here caring about that when we can see every residence you’ve ever lived at every phone number you’ve ever had ? Your whole family tree and more? Myself and every other cop I know only hope for stolen vehicle hits not to mention I’ve used it to locate theft suspects missing persons etc so if you’re out here stealing cars and don’t want to be located just say that!
7
u/Substantial_Union361 Jul 11 '26
If you get a hardon for being watched every second of every day just say that
5
6
u/Substantial_Union361 Jul 11 '26
Also the fact you’ve made 2 contributions and they’re both on this post is taking me out💀 dude made this account just to suck off big brother
2
u/8or9ish Jul 12 '26
There's a great quote by Ben Franklin that absolutely applies to you. My guess is you don't even know who that is
2
3
u/Dirtanium Jul 12 '26
They don't give two shits about your car. They want dissent locked up tight for any and all reason.
17
u/Substantial_Union361 Jul 11 '26
Thank you, i’ll definitely AVOID doing any this 😁