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

161–170 of 214 posts

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

#161

Post by MSFT_Edging »

GuB-42 wrote: post #146
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…

I am playing devil's advocate here, but mass surveillance can also save you. Let's say your just broke up with your girlfriend, shortly after, her house get burgled and a bunch of jewelry is stolen, including some you gave her when you were together. A surveillance camera catches the burglar, a drug addict with a criminal record, he gets caught, tried and sentenced to 2 years in prison. The kind of case that won't ge…

Police regularly ignore evidence that disproves their claims. They will not prove your innocence for you. It will still be up to you to pay the lawyer 1000s of dollars to do the discovery against flock cameras to attempt to prove your innocence.

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

#162

Post by SoftTalker »

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…

> We have seen how often pull over/arrests can derail when a stupid cop that is aggressive pulls out their weapon first

I'll bite. I'm sure it has happened. But how often?

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

#163

Post by MSFT_Edging »

giantg2 wrote: post #22
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…

"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.

The exceptions to the rule are very rare. I can think of one case where a person shot back during a no-knock raid on the wrong address and had charges dropped because police didn't announce their presence well enough.

As long as they shout "police", they can knock down your front door, throw a flash-bang into your infant's crib and disable them for life, then go "whoops" when they realize they have the wrong address and you'll be on the hook for replacing the door they destroyed.

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

#164

Post by c22 »

whatisthiseven wrote: post #87
hereme888 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Um, what? Have you seen any cop tasing videos? I've never seen it abused in every video I've seen (hundreds).

I know you are being sarcastic, but for others: I saw one literally yesterday of a game and wildlife officer tasing a man pumping gas. The gas spilled and then caught on fire. The tased man partially caught on fire and fell to the ground getting bruises. The officer continued yelling at him to comply, all the while the man was ablaze, shocked, and bruised. Cops should have tasers taken away. They believe they are "ma…

I think at the end of each year that an officer didn't deploy their taser all year, they should get a bonus equal to $100 x [consecutive years of non-deployment]. The same incentive should be in place for discharging their firearm, except maybe x$1000.

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

#165

Post by bluegatty »

queenkjuul wrote: post #121
bluegatty wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Flock is not helping cops be 'dirty cops' or anything. Yes it very much is, there's plenty of evidence Note that all the other charges against this person were dropped.

No, there's nothing specific or inherent about Flock that is specifically helping cops bad bad.

This is not like something that helps them cover their tracks, or hide behind some tool.

I don't like Flock, but it's the 'surveillance state' part of it that is bad.

In terms of 'cops being bad cops' - that's a separate thing.

Also - Flock for sure should not be allowed to be used in this kind of speculative kind of thing.

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

#166

Post by SoftTalker »

JuniperMesos wrote: post #148
tastyfreeze wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My last stint on grand jury we had a case that none of us felt great about. It was a felony theft charge where the thief likely used the vehicle regularly but took it in the middle of the night to return home. He was at a logging camp where he pays for accommodations but they had no work for him. After 3 days he got frustrated and left in the middle of the night. Camp foreman called the law reporting the vehicle stol…

So, uh, was the guy planning on bringing the vehicle back to the logging camp? It's not obvious to me that this wasn't in fact vehicle theft.

If they had previously allowed him to take the vehicle home, then I would presume he probably was planning to bring it back. Once you explicitly allow a person to do something, it becomes harder to claim harm when they do it again.

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

#167

Post by [deleted] »

searealist wrote: post #102

What 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 an…

[deleted]

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

#168

Post by cogman10 »

c22 wrote: post #147
cogman10 wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They don't need probable cause to search his vehicle if he had a warrant. Incorrect. Warrants have to be specific. An arrest warrant is not a general search warrant (in fact, general search warrants aren't legal). You don't lose your rights because a cop is arresting you. Now, what can happen (and probably would happen) is the cops can take a drug sniffing dog to the car when it goes to impound and while the owner…

It's called an "Inventory Search": https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported_files/tra...

Alright, thanks. I was unaware of this exception.

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

#169

Post by SoftTalker »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #161
GuB-42 wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am playing devil's advocate here, but mass surveillance can also save you. Let's say your just broke up with your girlfriend, shortly after, her house get burgled and a bunch of jewelry is stolen, including some you gave her when you were together. A surveillance camera catches the burglar, a drug addict with a criminal record, he gets caught, tried and sentenced to 2 years in prison. The kind of case that won't ge…

Police regularly ignore evidence that disproves their claims. They will not prove your innocence for you. It will still be up to you to pay the lawyer 1000s of dollars to do the discovery against flock cameras to attempt to prove your innocence.

You don't have to prove your innocence; innocence is assumed. The prosecution has to prove you guilty, and inform the defense of all the evidence that they have. If they have evidence that exonerates you, they would be stupid to even bring a case to trial as it would be a waste of everyone's time.

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

#170

Post by MSFT_Edging »

JK-Swizzle wrote: post #153
segmondy wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

https://abcnews.com/US/man-speaks-after-police-release-9-tra... He was attacked by a police dog after a flock camera misread his license plate. He was then charged for "obstruction", which was dropped 4 months later.

Police dogs are another insane thing we allow.

You can be mauled by a police dog and if you hit the dog, you get an assault on a police officer charge. It's bad enough a cop can permanently disable you if you can't follow 3 conflicting orders being yelled, but they can also send an animal who literally doesn't know better.

Post reply on HN