Big influx in politicsposting here lately, eh? Wonder what that's all about.
ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
31–40 of 89 posts
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#32How is this a `Hacker` new?
Anti-authoritarianism is a core part of the hacker ethos, so much so it’s even in the first paragraph of the Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hacker_ethic
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#33How does this square with FOIA obligations? I get ICE sidestepping transparency by avoiding creating the responsive footage in the first place, but once the body cam footage exists, what basis could they use to withhold it other than redacting footage for the typical reasons?
I mean, ICE is already sidestepping transparency by delaying FOIA requests to the Nth degree. Have a look:
https://www.muckrock.com/foi/list/?page=1&per_page=100&agenc...
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#34Big influx in politicsposting here lately, eh? Wonder what that's all about.
US midterms are coming up in November, politics are being thrust onto every corner of the internet at the moment.
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#35Treason! Hold them accountable!
That’s not treason, just bad governance. They do need accountability though
> not treason, just bad governance
ICE is damn close to an organisation of brownshirts. If they fuck with the elections in November, that's an organised effort to use violence to overthrow our Constitutional order. That would be treason.
We're not at the point of treason. But we have leaders credibly threatening to commit it. (I'd say Stephen Miller has commited treason. As in try-him-and-hang-him treason.
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#36im not sure why they would even bother with the cameras at that point.
> im not sure why they would even bother with the cameras at that point.
Lots of data to feed into their Palantir systems to keep track of l̵a̵w̵f̵u̵l̵ ̵p̵r̵o̵t̵e̵s̵t̵o̵r̵s̵ terrorists.
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#37Earlier quoted context omitted.
They don't care what you think. You're not their target audience.
yes, i am aware, thanks. (that's why i wrote my opinion on a message board, instead of a letter addressed to the director of ice)
They don't want to shake the support of moderates who are already part of their coalition and aren't paying that much attention. Those people won't notice the selectivity, even if they hear about it in passing, as long as they're not constantly confronted with it directly.
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#38im not sure why they would even bother with the cameras at that point.
> im not sure why they would even bother with the cameras at that point. Lots of data to feed into their Palantir systems to keep track of l̵a̵w̵f̵u̵l̵ ̵p̵r̵o̵t̵e̵s̵t̵o̵r̵s̵ terrorists.
>Lots of data to feed into their Palatir systems
i didnt think of that, actually, and facial recognition training and such actually sounds like a pretty plausible reason.
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#39Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s not treason, just bad governance. They do need accountability though
> not treason, just bad governance ICE is damn close to an organisation of brownshirts. If they fuck with the elections in November, that's an organised effort to use violence to overthrow our Constitutional order. That would be treason. We're not at the point of treason. But we have leaders credibly threatening to commit it. (I'd say Stephen Miller has commited treason. As in try-him-and-hang-him treason.
Yes it would be, but that hasn’t happened yet.
Re: ICE will release body cam video only when seen in the agency's 'best interests'
#40I've personally completely avoided the USA because of ICE, not because of principle of border policies purely from unpredictable treatment of people in custody with no recorse. Even if mistreatment are edge cases I've got no faith in the system to correct the wrong within itself. I've seen too many stories of legal americans and travelers not even getting bare minimum due process, or just being locked away for days no contact. I present and am read as a woman, if I get sent to male holding facility I'm just chum in the water. Which that decision could be made completely at the whim of the officer and the areas commanding officer, regardless of local laws.