I'm using legal liability for stalking and illegal searches as a tactic to get my town to take these down. Has anyone tried this route? https://rmnoflock.com/2026/07/29/rolling-meadows-flock-camer...
Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
101–110 of 215 posts
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#102What this article wants you to believe:
Police are actively using flock to identify people traveling over state borders to buy marijuana and search their cars.
What actually happened:
Police used flock to locate someone with an active warrant for their arrest related to domestic violence. They noticed a pattern of crossing state lines at certain times, and used that to nab him. It turns out it was to buy marijuana and his car reeked of it, so he was charged with that, too.
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#103This 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…
You started out right but this: "This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down." No. The 'domestic violence and prohibited substances' is the part that will ruin lives directly. Domestic violence, bad. The drugs, debatable, but that's a matter of getting 'weed' made legal, not a surveillance issue. It's not 'destroyed lives from crime…
> It's not the 'incident' that is the problem, because Flock is not helping cops be 'dirty cops' or anything.
That's exactly what Flock is doing. It's just the latest variation on "power corrupts".
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#104Earlier quoted context omitted.
> terrorize large cities Oh I wonder what kind of terror he's talking about > Illegal blocking of sidewalk selling fake handbags Jesus Christ. If this is what brings you to a surveillance state with open arms maybe you should talk to people outside of your bubble.
It doesn't have to be like this. Why do you accept it? Serious question. You don't need a surveillance state. How many indignities do you stomach for what exactly? Some false sense of freedom? Freedom to buy illegal unlicensed untaxed weed? Freedom to get run over by a delivery ebike?
> Why do you accept it?
I don't. I work every day to help my community and I hope you do the same.
> You don't need a surveillance state
Then don't call for one. If you'd like to change your community, again, I'd recommend you to stop being scared and just start talking to more people around you.
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#105Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
[flagged]
The issues you are complaining about are not issues due to a lack of mass surveillance. You're arguing in favor of mass surveillance with a diatribe of complaints over petty crimes that you describe as terrorism, while ignoring any of the potential downsides of what you are arguing for. Consider that you also break laws yourself, even if you think you don't, and what you are arguing for can and will be used against you too (not that one needs to break any laws for mass surveillance to be utilized against them).
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#106I'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…
Fun fact, they'd already need one if they weren't buying the data from private companies. This is because both the courts and legislature have been busy desecrating and burying the fourth amendment for decades.
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#107Also Flock, in the past week: All of Winona Police Department's Flock cameras cut down and stolen https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49171656 241 comments How Cops Are Trying to Hide Their Use of Flock https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49172076 9 comments Flock's CEO Faced Me After Its Cameras Led to My Wrongful Stop https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49156650 118 comments Flock – Chilling Effects: Long Island…
Man outlines how hardened criminals take down Flock cameras, detailing it step-by-step:
https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1v78ihu/...
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#108This 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
[deleted]
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#109This 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
Ah yes, the sheer terror of someone selling handbags.
If you consider that terrorizing, you need help.
Re: Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search
#110Again, I get downvoted by the fear-police on hacker news for this: - Montana LLC ownership of vehicles. Don't own your vehicles ya'll, and at least those license plates won't be traced to you. - Speak to a lawyer for how to meet any lawful use-tax obligations. Don't use this to avoid paying legitimate sales tax. - Maybe the insurance company tied to you and your driving of this vehicle, has a partnership with the flo…
I’m sorry but your solution is “don’t own a car?”