Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

404media.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 214 posts

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#31

Post by segmondy »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #11

This is the big problem with mass surveillance as a whole. With enough time, they'll find some pretext to bring you in, even if the original crime they want you for is weak. This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down. Lives will be completely derailed, police and judges will not be held accountable. The wrongful arrestees will stil…

Someone that is innocent is going to get killed soon because flock flagged them incorrectly. I recall reading the auto journalist that got flagged for a stolen car while test driving a car. We have seen how often pull over/arrests can derail when a stupid cop that is aggressive pulls out their weapon first, fires fast and then investigates last. An innocent person that reacts wrongly is eventually going to make the news. :-(

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#32

Post by ck2 »

is anyone else old enough to remember when cops first got tasers

suddenly EVERYONE was getting tased

it's like that

give them a new "toy" to combat violent crime and instead it's used on everything else because zero repercussions

I am starting to see Flock on the side of the road at every major shopping center

unfortunately like "kavanaugh stops" I suspect the supreme court is going to put their permission into concrete regardless how they are abused

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kavanaugh_stop

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#33

Post by saghm »

Muromec wrote: post #10
garyfirestorm wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IANAL - if they break the bail conditions the judge may issue a warrant depending on severity, clearly a warrant was not issued here, otherwise there’s no need for pretext like you said. Article also states bail jumping charge was dismissed but the weed charge is the only charge that remains.

They still have to bother with actually going to a judge and actually getting that warrant. Why do that if you can just skip it and not deal with inconvenient questions.

The Flock camera network is much less of a stickler for those pesky civil liberties being respected

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#34

Post by goda90 »

bko wrote: post #17
hwillis wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. those charges were dismissed 2. the article address that specifically: > The case is an example of Flock cameras being used to arrest a wanted alleged criminal suspected of committing a violent crime. But it is also an example of police surveillance overreach *in that the cameras were specifically used to create a pretext to tack on additional petty crimes* based primarily on where a person’s vehicle had traveled.

I think using technology to capture alleged criminals is a good thing.

The Party was great at using Viewscreen technology to catch thought criminals.

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#35

Post by giantg2 »

BeefySwain wrote: post #29
giantg2 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Even if they're wrong, you can't shoot back." Depends on the situation. You'd absolutely be arrested. Get in front of a jury of 12 people and you might have a chance if you have enough evidence for a self-defense claim and the cop acting outside of the law.

Good luck living long enough to see a jury

The choice in this hypothetical scenario is to be killed initially through the unlawful use of force or potentially be killed at some later time before reaching trial.

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#36

Post by saghm »

ck2 wrote: post #32

is anyone else old enough to remember when cops first got tasers suddenly EVERYONE was getting tased it's like that give them a new "toy" to combat violent crime and instead it's used on everything else because zero repercussions I am starting to see Flock on the side of the road at every major shopping center unfortunately like "kavanaugh stops" I suspect the supreme court is going to put their permission into concr…

"Don't flock camera me bro"

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#37

Post by smallybigs »

bko wrote: post #15
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #11

This is the big problem with mass surveillance as a whole. With enough time, they'll find some pretext to bring you in, even if the original crime they want you for is weak. This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down. Lives will be completely derailed, police and judges will not be held accountable. The wrongful arrestees will stil…

Maybe they can start enforcing the law when it comes to blatant offenders that terrorize large cities. Illegal blocking of sidewalk selling fake handbags, selling untaxed marijuana on street corners, violating traffic laws on e-bikes. A lot of wood to chop before they get to my jay walking so I think I’m safe for the time being. But I welcome more enforcement

Brother, you want mass surveillance because of bikes, handbags, and weed.

I guarantee there is _some_ group that finds some aspect of you, your life, or that of some of your loved ones at least as annoying as you find those things.

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#38

Post by Cider9986 »

I've seen it suggested to add a warrant requirement for police to use ALPRs. A warrant requirement is not a reasonable bandaid to consider allowing mass spying. There should be no mass spying by default.

A warrant requirement makes sense for something like the locations of customers on cellular networks, because it's built into the tech.

When you make the optional choice to create mass spying, safeguards do not make it acceptable.

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#39

Post by site-packages1 »

TZubiri wrote: post #25

I don't quite get the thesis of the author here. Regardless of the view that one may have on Cannabis laws, they are illegal, if the system is correctly detaining people that break those laws, and you have a problem with that, is the problem with the enforcement system or the law? If you don't like some aspect of this, should you be campaigning for removal of flock cameras? Or campaigning for cannabis rights and Cont…

The issue isn't prosecution for illegality, among other things it's the anti-Fourth-Amendment methods for constructing the case. So, I'm going to campaign for government entities to follow the Constitution (as amended).

Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

#40

Post by dgellow »

segmondy wrote: post #31
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #11

This is the big problem with mass surveillance as a whole. With enough time, they'll find some pretext to bring you in, even if the original crime they want you for is weak. This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down. Lives will be completely derailed, police and judges will not be held accountable. The wrongful arrestees will stil…

Someone that is innocent is going to get killed soon because flock flagged them incorrectly. I recall reading the auto journalist that got flagged for a stolen car while test driving a car. We have seen how often pull over/arrests can derail when a stupid cop that is aggressive pulls out their weapon first, fires fast and then investigates last. An innocent person that reacts wrongly is eventually going to make the n…

That might already have happened for all we know
Post reply on HN