Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't help but wonder what skin color those young men had that made the police suspicious in the first place...
[flagged]
That they're not willfully blind to the reality we live in?
Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
111–120 of 235 posts
Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#112Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
I think this is basically a cherry-picking and oversimplification of the situation. For one thing, income inequality in Brazil is significantly higher than in Bangladesh. Also remember that I was speaking in the context of the wealthiest country on earth. We could perhaps assume that Brazil may not have the resources to end poverty and crime, but the USA definitely does.
> Also remember that I was speaking in the context of the wealthiest country on earth. We could perhaps assume that Brazil may not have the resources to end poverty and crime, but the USA definitely does.
That doesn't matter. If crime is caused by poverty, like you hypothesize, then poor countries like Bangladesh should have astronomical crime rates. But they don't.
Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#113Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#114Earlier quoted context omitted.
So we'd rather a high speed chase, crashes, danger to cyclists and pedestrians? I'd rather a drone follows the car until it stops and the police arrive to retrieve it and give a hand slap to the offender. I know this is lagging, and American culture will take decades to accept it, but the better our police are the lighter the sentences can be. Part of why a big hard sentence was seen as a deterrent was sort of the ER…
> So we'd rather a high speed chase, crashes, danger to cyclists and pedestrians? Yes, this is preferable to me when compared to a society where police can surveil everyone, everywhere for no crime at all. I don't want to sit on my roof listening to music and wonder how many police drones are watching me, trying to figure out if I'm a "prowler." I don't want to be followed by a police drone while I'm on my way to the…
People will shoot themselves in the foot if it means criminals get harsher punishments, sometimes literally.
Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#115Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I had to pick one, I'd go with the Fourth Amendment.
Did you read the article… These are being used for active calls only. Can you describe how this breaks the 4th? Does it really matter if it’s a human tracking down a suspect or a drone. If you have any case law that shows general cameras break the 4th I would love to read.
> Did you read the article… These are being used for active calls only.
I'm the person who posted the article lol. The article lists several cases where the drones were used to investigate random people – not active calls. They deployed drones to spy on some guy listening to music on his roof, and used drones to follow two "suspicious individuals" who were just driving to a basketball court. Another instance had drones hovering around outside an apartment building's windows while police were apparently inside.
The department's drone use policy says that footage should only be recorded when the drone is at the scene to minimize the exposure of people unrelated to the investigation, but the investigators found that the drones are recording constantly, from takeoff to landing, and capturing everyone and their dog in between.
> Can you describe how this breaks the 4th?
Put me on the Supreme Court and I'd be happy to do that for you. Until then, there are more qualified people to do it and the rest of us will just know it when we see it. :)
edit: removed the part where I said u/infecto didn't read the article – it's clear we both read it and came away with different conclusions.
Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#116Earlier quoted context omitted.
Scale. The possibility of surveillance was far less worrying when three police officers had to tail you, because they'd only expend that effort when they were pretty sure you'd done a crime.
I mean, helicopters are a limited and expensive resource. And here it looks like they use it on criminals on the run - not something they use to practically monitor each person like some surveillance system, or court ordered wiretap At least, that’s what I’ve gathered
And helicopters tracking you are hard to miss.
Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#117Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yup I did and it was not clear. I think those two examples are worthy of a discussion on scope creep but not clear policy violations atm. The intent is to be used on active calls which I believe is a great idea. A clear violation would be the drones actively patrolling and identify suspicious behavior. That’s bad and a clear violation of the policy. Please let us know how this violates the 4th. I would love to learn…
> Please let us know how this violates the 4th. It seem awfully similar to the geofence surveillance SCOTUS just said requires a warrant. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-112_0am4.pdf
Maybe similar trajectory but fundamentally Chatrie is about compelling stored data from a third party. I don’t believe there is any meaningful overlap between that and direct visual observation from police. Folks should argue it in court if so but I don’t see the link to 4th violations.
Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#118Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#119Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Please let us know how this violates the 4th. It seem awfully similar to the geofence surveillance SCOTUS just said requires a warrant. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25pdf/25-112_0am4.pdf
Maybe similar trajectory but fundamentally Chatrie is about compelling stored data from a third party. I don’t believe there is any meaningful overlap between that and direct visual observation from police. Folks should argue it in court if so but I don’t see the link to 4th violations.
Chatrie has sections like this:
> Second, Location History allows police to reconstruct “retrospective[ly],” and with no real effort, people’s comings and goings in any area, enabling “tireless and absolute surveillance” of any number of people in any number of places.
A certain level of drone surveillance would seem likely to rise to this level of intrusion, and I think ALPR cameras already do.
Re: Leak of San Francisco Police Drone Footage Exposes Reality of Urban Surveillance
#120Earlier quoted context omitted.
"We're bringing the paranoid old biddy HOA worldview to everyone, non-consensually!" is your upside ?
[flagged]
People generally recognize there isn't a universal ideal place to live, because people are often different.
Some people leave the rural paniopticon where half of the dating pool are cousins for a reason, for example.
Why'd your Dad leave?