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

Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

texastribune.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 328 posts

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#171

Post by oopsieDayz »

derriz wrote: post #168
butvacuum wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people freqently conflate Stand Your Ground vs Duty to Retreat... with the entire rest of the debate. I'm trying to keep this neutral, so I'm using a rather cut and dry example: Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. investigation finds a sabatoged eng…

> Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. Which jurisdictions? Is this in the US? I’ve lived in a bunch of European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation.

It's a BS

If someone comes through your home door guns akimbo in the US, blasting back is fine

US Supreme court has often leaned heavily on right to protect self in one's own home in ruling against local and state laws that might ban ridiculous things.

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#172

Post by DarmokTanagra »

alex43578 wrote: post #162
DarmokTanagra wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Carpenter v. United States and the supporting opinion written by John Roberts in 2018 reaffirms that ongoing electronic surveillance requires a search warrant and constitutes a violation of the 4th amendment. I don't live in the US, but it seems that constant monitoring via government sanctioned facial recognition technology falls under that umbrella.

Carpenter only covers cell data and was specifically meant to apply narrowly to that type of info.

Good thing that there isn't a court in the United States that exists solely to make those kinds of distinctions and revise previous interpretations of the law in order to apply them to an evolving legal landscape.

Flock cameras using facial recognition to surveil citizens in public spaces without a warrant is a 4th amendment violation under any rational reading, and it is up to the American people whether they want to live in country that no longer holds itself accountable to the law or not.

It really has no impact on my life beyond the looming existential crisis of the world's largest military and nuclear power slowly becoming a rogue fascist state.

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#173

Post by DarmokTanagra »

bpodgursky wrote: post #93
DarmokTanagra wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In American style representative democracy there certainly are places where voting is useless depending on your political affiliation.

Only if you are too stubborn to register as the dominant party and vote in the primary.

"Voting works, you just need to compromise your beliefs and pretend to be someone that hates everything you believe in to participate!"

Hallmark of a healthy democracy.

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#174

Post by lukan »

derriz wrote: post #168
butvacuum wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people freqently conflate Stand Your Ground vs Duty to Retreat... with the entire rest of the debate. I'm trying to keep this neutral, so I'm using a rather cut and dry example: Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. investigation finds a sabatoged eng…

> Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. Which jurisdictions? Is this in the US? I’ve lived in a bunch of European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation.

Germany has had some weird court decisions in that regard, in general the law does say flee and not shoot back if this is an option. But mostly courts are reasonable and do not punish the victim. Only if the victim decides to use violence after the threat is over

https://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/3/15/3-199-15.php

But there was even a case, where a hells angel shot a police officer in his home who were doing a raid - and got free (because they did not identify themself as police).

https://www.lto.de/recht/hintergruende/h/bgh-spricht-hells-a...

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#175

Post by ekianjo »

derriz wrote: post #168
butvacuum wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

people freqently conflate Stand Your Ground vs Duty to Retreat... with the entire rest of the debate. I'm trying to keep this neutral, so I'm using a rather cut and dry example: Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. investigation finds a sabatoged eng…

> Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. Which jurisdictions? Is this in the US? I’ve lived in a bunch of European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation.

> European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation.

Local news say otherwise

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#176

Post by bulbar »

lukan wrote: post #174
derriz wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. Which jurisdictions? Is this in the US? I’ve lived in a bunch of European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation.

Germany has had some weird court decisions in that regard, in general the law does say flee and not shoot back if this is an option. But mostly courts are reasonable and do not punish the victim. Only if the victim decides to use violence after the threat is over https://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/3/15/3-199-15.php But there was even a case, where a hells angel shot a police officer in his home who were doing a raid - and…

The law says your are allowed to stand your ground. You don't have to flee.

> But there was even a case,

I don't know the details of the case, but if somebody thought some criminals are raiding his house with guns and it's reasonable the he thought that, then he's fully within his rights to defend himself and, depending on the necessities, by shooting at them.

Still terrible what happened, of course.

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#177

Post by lukan »

bulbar wrote: post #176
lukan wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Germany has had some weird court decisions in that regard, in general the law does say flee and not shoot back if this is an option. But mostly courts are reasonable and do not punish the victim. Only if the victim decides to use violence after the threat is over https://www.hrr-strafrecht.de/3/15/3-199-15.php But there was even a case, where a hells angel shot a police officer in his home who were doing a raid - and…

The law says your are allowed to stand your ground. You don't have to flee. > But there was even a case, I don't know the details of the case, but if somebody thought some criminals are raiding his house with guns and it's reasonable the he thought that, then he's fully within his rights to defend himself and, depending on the necessities, by shooting at them. Still terrible what happened, of course.

"The law says your are allowed to stand your ground. You don't have to flee."

No it does not in germany (and I think most other states of the world).

If fleeing is a safe option - this is what you have to do instead of shooting. Reality just seldom is so clear.

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#178

Post by bulbar »

ekianjo wrote: post #175
derriz wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Somebody kicks in your door with a pump action and starts shooting- There are _some_ jurisdictions that require you to try and flee. You kill them and they werent bodily blocking your car in? Murder charge. Which jurisdictions? Is this in the US? I’ve lived in a bunch of European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation.

> European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation. Local news say otherwise

Because local news love to omit certain details of a case or don't know them to begin with.

They make money reporting what people want to read and that's not necessary what's true.

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#179

Post by Planktonne »

rayiner wrote: post #90
aidenn0 wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can also mean unjustified/immoral killing, which can be a useful definition (otherwise e.g. a true dictator can never murder anyone).

That’s not a useful definition in a democracy. Who gets to define what’s justified if not the duly elected legislature? I bet if you put the current Texas law on the ballot today you’d get the same answer.

It is a useful definition, because it allows you to talk about places where the law might be unjust.

You can't have a functioning democracy if it's impossible to criticise the current setup. This is the whole idea behind newspeak [1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newspeak

Re: Lawmakers added $1 to car insurance policies. That money paid for Flock cameras

#180

Post by dessimus »

Scrapemist wrote: post #100
earth-tattoo wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All lives are not equal. The value of the life of a thief whose only impact on the society is negative, cannot be compared to e.g. a doctor.

So why would someone risk his live and become a thief instead of a doctor?

Laziness mostly. It takes at least a decade of sustained exhausting mental and physical work to become a doctor, becoming a thief is mostly opportunity.
Post reply on HN