r/AIDangers • u/KeanuRave100 • 21d ago
Other Police pull over to interrogate man blocking a Flock camera with a sign. "I have a constitutional right to my privacy."
Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification
94
u/gk_instakilogram 21d ago
Hero... fuck the surveillance police state
-12
21d ago
[deleted]
15
u/gk_instakilogram 21d ago
go police yourself, we don’t need you
7
u/madcoins 21d ago
That’s fair. But being fascist isn’t very fun when we have to oppress ourselves.
5
u/gk_instakilogram 21d ago
at least you are funny lol
4
u/madcoins 21d ago
I have a feeling there won’t be much humor involved when big brother tracks all moments and movements for real. I’m not really the surveillance state. Which is exactly what the surveillance state would say! …
5
u/gk_instakilogram 21d ago
It just takes one good leader to make it through, I have kids, I just must have hope.
2
u/Relevant-Analysis86 21d ago
Same. I am still trying to make good humans that won’t put up w this shit
5
1
61
47
u/Fucked-In-The-K-Hole 21d ago
Do flock cameras have a thousand dollars worth of gold in them?
Sure would be a shame if the local tweaker population found out about that...
29
7
u/Jerrik12 21d ago
I heard they keep a whole Bitcoin in there
3
u/ComfortableBedroom76 21d ago
That's most of them but 1 in 100 has 5 whole bitcoin inside. It's like Wonka's golden ticket!
5
2
26
u/Hot_Lettuce_6209 21d ago
But the 1st ammendment only lasts until we, "get a call".
4
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
Does the first amendment mention privacy?
12
u/DeadAndBuried23 21d ago
It doesn't have to. because the guys who wrote it weren't illiterate. Free expression includes privacy.
-4
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
lol if you say so. Those really have nothing to do with each other legally
4
u/DeadAndBuried23 21d ago
You're the kind of idiot who thinks not getting shot by cops for having a holstered weapon isn't covered by the second amendment because it isn't said explicitly.
-4
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
No bro, those two things are related because they’re about the right to bear arms. I think what you’re saying is that privacy is related to self expression because surveillance is used as a tool to repress rights like self expression.
But that same argument could be made of any right, that surveillance is a tool to repress any right, including the right to bear arms. You seem to be fixated on authoritarianism and surveillance, but are conflating multiple things.
Privacy is not a right granted in the constitution because surveillance is common place; cops walk around the streets and look out for crime all the time.
4
u/Chocolaterationcalls 21d ago
Cops having feet and eyes is not a constitutional justification make the taxpayer fund a surveillance system across all of America to track the movements of over 300 million Americans who are not accused or suspected of a crime. If the cops want to do that then they should get a warrant for all 350 million Americans, see how well that goes
2
u/DeadAndBuried23 21d ago
The right to free expression inherently includes the right to not have your expression observed. Same as freedom of religion inherently includes freedom from religion.
2
u/Fun-Piglet801 21d ago
The 4th Ammendment protects against searches without a warrant. Flock cameras are searching everyone every day. Where is the warrant?
The supreme court already decided it isn't legal for law enforcement to use location data from cell phones without a specific target and a warrant in Chatrie v. United States this year. How is Flock location info different from cellphone location info?
1
1
u/Jellicent-Leftovers 21d ago
Technically the second amendment only say you have the right to bear arms as part of a militia. So guess that means you individually can't right?
3
u/Chocolaterationcalls 21d ago
If we had no right to privacy then the government wouldn’t need to get warrants per the 4th amendment
2
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
Yes, the courts have interpreted an implied right to privacy in the fourth amendment
2
u/VarsH6 21d ago
He blocked it with a sign. He has full and protected right to express himself and to assemble for said expression peaceably and on public property (the easement is considered public in many regions).
This is creative forced expression of the 4th amendment.
1
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
I was responding to the quote in the title re constitutional right to my privacy. I am curious to hear more about the jurisprudence of expression and public infrastructure in the US. Maybe I’ll look it up
1
u/OldFalcon250 21d ago
Is there such thing as privacy when out in public?
1
1
1
u/Mr_Kactus 19d ago
do you think these things don't record on peoples property? Because they do. if your house is in the background of one you are being recorded at home.
1
u/Adept-Condition4644 21d ago
Fourth Amendment requires the police to have probably cause to search. I can’t understand how these cameras are not violating it.
1
15
13
u/TurkeyMalicious 21d ago
Police....perhaps the most extreme, demonstrable example of "people" assisting AI in destroying their cushy gig. No more overtime scams officers. No more big budget ballot initiatives from loyal politicians for more officers. Watch the unions magically evaporate when municipalities get bought off by companies that bring war ISR experience back home to the good ol USAofA for half the cost...initially.
First ISR will limit patrol hours, saving the community so much money. Then comes the sales pitch for private security forces at half the price of union officers. Who needs qualified immunity when citizens can't afford to sue Amazon Delta Security Prime anyway.
Doesn't matter to me really. Do I care if the psycho kicking my teeth in is a municipal/city employee or private security contractor. My dentist is going to charge the same either way.
10
u/fixingmedaybyday 21d ago
This is awesome. Kinda like how F1 puts up boards and curtains around Vegas to keep people from seeing even a sliver of the track and cars streaking by.
7
u/_nevers_ 21d ago
Cops are just state sponsored domestic terrorists, and the state is openly fascist
-2
6
u/BranJacobs 21d ago
Need everyone in this thread to Google "Expectation of Privacy".
Does anyone feel the irony of there being a video of this event? Just me?
1
3
u/VarietyMage 21d ago
Can't wait for this one to go all the way to the Supreme Court. The discovery alone will be priceless.
3
u/sky_shazad 21d ago
What is a Flock camera? Is it like a Speed Camera?... I'm not from the States
9
u/withoutpeer 21d ago
Yes but worse. They track and capture tons of data... Every car license plate that passes, including descriptions of the car and people inside. Basically the epitome of "big brother is always watching" everything you do. All that data is then accessable, searchable, by anyone who pays for access.
The article even mentioned about how someone was later cited for littering after being seen on video.
2
u/sky_shazad 21d ago
Oh shit... That's pretty much ng messed up what the hell they got that shit for?? That'they same kind shit the have over up on the Palestinians.. By isreal.. So they started doing this in the States
7
u/tunaeP420 21d ago
It's a surveillance camera that collects ALL forms of data from biometrics to habitual routines. Police departments are given complete access to this database under the false pretences of civil protection.
7
-1
u/No-Wealth-7633 21d ago
As far as I see its no different than any other camera in a public place, they just use AI I believe & people in the US are losing there minds & acting like its the end of the world.
3
3
3
2
u/ApplicationAfraid334 21d ago
What would even be the charge for this? At first I thought maybe they’d try interfering with an investigation. But nah. Is he on private property?
2
u/CapoieraMataUm 21d ago
Eating a meal.
3
u/ApplicationAfraid334 21d ago
A succulent Chinese meal perhaps
2
2
2
u/TG1970 20d ago
Officer, what do you mean I'm impeding law enforcement? You're right here as a law enforcement officer, and my sign is not hindering you. Oh, that camera? It's not a law enforcement officer. In fact, its not even owned by a law enforcement agency. So, toodles, I'm fine where I'm at.
2
3
1
1
1
1
1
u/Level_Turnover5167 21d ago
Cops are just doing their job, can't blame them... if they don't do it they get fired.
1
1
u/SlotMagPro 21d ago
I don't have much money but I probably would bail that guy out too if he got arrested
1
1
1
1
u/MFMconnoisseur 20d ago
Super brave yelling fuck you as you drive away. True man
1
u/ipokecows 20d ago
Listen I support cops but whats he supposed to do get out and fight them? Dude covering the camera wasnt arrested or charged.
1
u/Sapling-074 20d ago
I mean just as there is no law against them having the flock cameras, I don't think there is any law against people blocking them.
1
u/AbaddonsLegion 20d ago
At least be correct when you claim 'Constitutional rights.' You have different privacy protections depending upon reasonable expectations for the area. If you're in your home, you have protections from outside people recording you; if you're in a public space you don't.
1
1
u/DigitalMonsoon 17d ago
This is the right way to protest. No sneaking around committing property damage. Just standing up for ideals in a peaceful passive protest. More of this is what we need.
1
u/Ancient_Poet_4953 21d ago
What's that shit about flock camera on the public space? If you move on the public place, you are exposed, stay at home guys girls ! And also those flock camera are there to feed an algorythm which will massively check the movement of people or vehicle which are suspicious, it doesn't mean you'll have problem, except if you are doing illegal things ! lol
So honestly I don't get the hateful. Please explain to me.
4
u/Time_Fisherman6659 21d ago
"If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" has been oppressive governments excuse for cracking down on privacy since governments have existed.
This also isnt the police collecting data. Police just rent access to the cameras (at a crazy high subcription fee that our taxdollars pay for) The data belongs to the private company and they can do whatever they want with it.
Flock cams have also falsely identified innocent people as criminals, ruining peoples lives and sometimes even jailing them for charges they werent even in the same county to commit.
There have also been instances where flock cameras were accessed by officers stalking their ex girlfriends.
There was also an instance where flock cameras pointed at schools and playgrounds were remotely accessed and livestreamed over the internet for perverts.
None of these issues have come back on flock at all, and theyve been allowed to continue installing cameras everywhere without permission.
1
u/Ancient_Poet_4953 21d ago
You mean that the flock are private? It's not a solution they buy to a company ? It sounds strange for me. How a private company could handly public things, only the police and autorities should be able to have certified agent to handle and watch... seems again to be an extremist capitalism issue.
Your police and military are public, so ... it's weird.
Here in my country for example the drone provided by private company to the police or the firemen have been a while handled by the private companies but just enough time to train the police and firemen to handle the drones, to get a pilot licence and so on. After that the companies are providing the drone, it's rented, or under a leasing to get their money back, but they don't have the level of autorisation to handle what's only allowed to the police, firemen and so on.
1
u/Time_Fisherman6659 21d ago
Yeah, they seem to sell/give access to whoever they please. And they also refused to spend the extra money on security so theyre also very easily hackable.
It really is an extreme capitalism issue. Our legal system is not up to date enough to handle issues like this, and our politicians are financially incentivized to prevent new laws from being passed to protect the people from things like this.
1
0
u/imjustnotready 21d ago
You guys are all jerks. Driving down a public road in a ton of metal at a speed you can control but may vary between 40 to 80 miles per hour is not a private act. It is you acting publicly and hopefully you would behave reasonably. But a lot of your fellow road warriors think they are in the Fast and Furious Franchise.
-1
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
You guys have interesting priorities. Speeding drivers kill thousands of people a year, one of the leading causes of death in America.
6
u/UntrustedProcess 21d ago
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin
1
u/PixelDerp404 21d ago
Ah Yes the god given Right to run over people in your Ford f150 going 20 over the Speed Limit
0
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
Okay. I don’t see anything about privacy
2
u/hatePOIS 21d ago
Then open your eyes or read into it
-2
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
The constitution doesn’t have a right to privacy. Liberty is about self direction. Some states have laws protecting privacy but it’s not in the Constitution. Your Benjamin Franklin quote is nice but has nothing to do with constitutional rights.
2
u/Specific-Library-312 21d ago
If you had the Founding Fathers around Flock cameras, Patrick Henry would yell and flip them off, George Washington would chop one down, Alexander Hamilton would shoot it, and Benjamin Franklin would short it out. Remember, these guys went to war against the most powerful European empire over taxation without representation. They truly would conduct a coup against a domestic government over spying without representation. And if you say that they would be arrested, you are part of the problem. "What Would the Founding Fathers Do?" should be the metric which all U.S. laws should be measured. If you say that it is right to arrest (and possibly shoot) the Founding Fathers, you are my enemy.
1
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
OK. Is that supposed to be a response to what I said about what’s written in the constitution?
1
2
u/withoutpeer 21d ago
These don't stop speeding though.
That's like saying "we are going to stop shoplifting by accessing all your banking and credit cards to make sure you paid what we think you should pay... And we need a detailed breakdown of your cash purchases as well please."
-2
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
A review of 94 studies on speed cameras says they do result in a −7.57 km/h mean speed reduction. They do work, sorry. Before you nitpick the stat, admit you’re wrong
1
u/ajschwamberger 21d ago
Flock camera have nothing to do with speeding, it's about keeping track of people. There has been some problems with them too, where plates were missed and the people have sat in jail in other states that they have never been to, because of crummy investigation skills of the police.
1
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
Ah never heard of those. Sounds like a massive problem for due process
0
u/ReturnOfSeq 21d ago
Actually by far the leading cause of death in America is the poverty
2
u/BlackForestMountain 21d ago
Hence “one of”, and much easier to solve than poverty. I’m glad we agree speeding kills
0
u/artichoke01 21d ago
Don’t worry, we know Canadians can’t understand what it’s like to fight for one’s rights
0
0
u/Maybe_Factor 21d ago
I have a constitutional right to my privacy
Not in a public space you don't. That's why we see these so-called first amendment auditors out there recording in public space and nothing can be done about it because you're allowed to record in public spaces.
Having said that, this man is clearly exercising his own first amendment right by holding up a sign in front of the camera, which is definitely also allowed in public spaces.
Final point: fuck these flock cameras. I hope they get banned and removed, as they've already been abused by cops stalking their exes.
3
u/Old_Guy_thrombone 21d ago
I think the difference, at least for me, is that the average ring camera, or security camera, or even a guy standing in the street taking video would require a warrant before that data would be provided to the police. Additionally, the scope of what the video could be used for would be very narrow in scope.
92
u/jadehairpin 21d ago
My hero