Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search • Hacker News Board

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

#111

Post by bko » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:16 PM UTC

jst1fthsdys wrote: post #85

bko wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

[flagged]

Why is this a reality? Tokyo is not like this. There was a lot less of this petty criminality 10 years ago.

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

#112

Post by antonvs » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:17 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #91

FireBeyond wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Flock's CEO, yes. He has stated he sees a false positive as a better outcome than a false negative.

Flock provides technology. They don't set the laws. It's like complaining about the CEO of Ford bc a police Ford vehicle damaged some property

Flock provides tools and information that influence and encourage bad behavior from police.

Yes, we need laws to help stop this. Ideally, those laws should entirely destroy Flock's business model and lead to its bankruptcy.

The issue is not whether cameras are useful for law enforcement. The issue is how that camera information is managed and overseen. What Flock is doing would fit right in in a cartoon authoritarian state, but it doesn't belong in the real world.

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

#113

Post by OGWhales » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:17 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #96

Windchaser wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "filth and crime" checks, it's "people selling untaxed marijuana" Yeahhhh, we have radically different ideas about what constitutes "they're terrorizing my city". Casual use of heavy-handed law enforcement makes things much, much worse, not better.

Heavy handed? How about light handed. You're not allowed to sell illegal drugs on the street? Why do we allow this? Do you just not believe that there should be no laws that prevent people from posting up convenience stores on street corners? Or that police should look the other way bc it's too heavy handed to just detain the few dozen ppl that do this until they stop. This wasn't a thing 10 years ago and we weren't…

> This wasn't a thing 10 years ago and we weren't in a police state

Curious then that you are arguing in favor of a police state with mass surveillance to solve these issues...

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

#114

Post by euroderf » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:18 PM UTC

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…

What you describe could pass for the USSR all over again.

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

#115

Post by dpoloncsak » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:18 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #96

Windchaser wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "filth and crime" checks, it's "people selling untaxed marijuana" Yeahhhh, we have radically different ideas about what constitutes "they're terrorizing my city". Casual use of heavy-handed law enforcement makes things much, much worse, not better.

Heavy handed? How about light handed. You're not allowed to sell illegal drugs on the street? Why do we allow this? Do you just not believe that there should be no laws that prevent people from posting up convenience stores on street corners? Or that police should look the other way bc it's too heavy handed to just detain the few dozen ppl that do this until they stop. This wasn't a thing 10 years ago and we weren't…

Selling untaxed Marijuana in a legal state is not selling 'illegal drugs', just saying.

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

#116

Post by Windchaser » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:21 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #96

Windchaser wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "filth and crime" checks, it's "people selling untaxed marijuana" Yeahhhh, we have radically different ideas about what constitutes "they're terrorizing my city". Casual use of heavy-handed law enforcement makes things much, much worse, not better.

Heavy handed? How about light handed. You're not allowed to sell illegal drugs on the street? Why do we allow this? Do you just not believe that there should be no laws that prevent people from posting up convenience stores on street corners? Or that police should look the other way bc it's too heavy handed to just detain the few dozen ppl that do this until they stop. This wasn't a thing 10 years ago and we weren't…

> You're not allowed to sell illegal drugs on the street? ... Or that police should look the other way bc it's too heavy handed to just detain the few dozen ppl that do this until they stop.

I don't think you need to arrest someone because they're selling an untaxed legal substance, no. (And: weed should be legal, if we're talking about a place where it's not).

You can manage this situation better by getting their info and issuing a ticket. On its face, it doesn't warrant an escalation of force, the extra paperwork, or choking up the jails -- all of which represent very real costs to us, the taxpayers.

> This wasn't a thing 10 years ago and we weren't in a police state

Buddy, I have some news for you about the history of the US. Ten years ago, which country/countries had the highest incarceration rate in the world?

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

#117

Post by darod » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:22 PM UTC

is it legal for police to track your movements in a state they have no jurisdiction in?

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

#118

Post by ux266478 » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:23 PM UTC

daun_gee wrote: post #18

[dead]

The farm bill he enacted in his first term was a pretty solid legalization middle ground. The fact he flipped around on it in his second term makes me think it's more accidental than anything.

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

#119

Post by cucumber3732842 » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:23 PM UTC

cmrdporcupine wrote: post #76

blamecanada69 wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't need Canadians telling Americans that we're wrong to worry about American police, or that we need to be more specific with our concerns. American police kill over 1,000 civilians and 10,000 dogs per year. They routinely wrongly arrest people, and create life-ruining situations, especially as American workers do not enjoy as much job protection as Canadian workers. I get that you want to be offended by his po…

Because said person is sitting here saying "HN is stupid", it has nothing to do with the police, but the audience he's going after. Read what he wrote and I wrote again. Nobody is excusing American police. I'm griping about his attempts to smear random people on this forum. Nowhere did I tell you you're wrong to worry about American police. FFS, I worry about American police and I don't live there. Hence why I won't…

>Because said person is sitting here saying "HN is stupid", it has nothing to do with the police, but the audience he's going after.

I said that if you go into policy discussions where HN is pro regulation you can see all sorts of commenters cheering for the pro-jackboot takes and peddlers thereof.

It's a subtle distinction between that and "the whole place is stupid" but it's there.

> I'm griping about his attempts to smear random people on this forum.

Want me to name names? I can go right down the leader board saying who wants jackboot applied and on what policy axis. I don't think that's productive.

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

#120

Post by FireBeyond » Wed, Aug 05, 2026, 5:23 PM UTC

bko wrote: post #91

FireBeyond wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Flock's CEO, yes. He has stated he sees a false positive as a better outcome than a false negative.

Flock provides technology. They don't set the laws. It's like complaining about the CEO of Ford bc a police Ford vehicle damaged some property

Sure. I actually worked for Flock.

I watched them happily train officers from Agencies on doing things they were not allowed to do by law, that Flock knew they weren't.

That "Chinese wall" of separation is nowhere near as concrete as you like to act.

Flock might not set the laws, but when the Flock CEO says he would prefer you to be collateral damage on his company's mission for "a world without crime, thanks to Flock" than dare risk someone not get caught for a crime or alleged crime, via Flock, then sorry, they absolutely are participating in things, and complaints against them are entirely appropriately targeted.