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

221–230 of 328 posts

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

#221

Post by alex43578 »

filoeleven wrote: post #215
alex43578 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures" in case you forgot. I'm not saying you have to reply in a technical term - just explain how being seen and recorded driving down a public street, in a vehicle that's required to display an identifiable plate you've registered with the government, constitutes a search, seizure, or even an in…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chatrie_v._United_States

“Individuals have reasonable expectations of privacy in their cell phone location information. The court did not hold that geofence warrants are unconstitutional”

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

#222

Post by spicymaki »

alex43578 wrote: post #123
DarmokTanagra wrote: post #60

For a country that staged a revolution over a tea tax modern Americans sure seem to love having their rights trampled.

What right does a Flock camera violate?

> What right does a Flock camera violate?

The first amendment, fourth amendment, and the fourteenth amendment of the US Constitution. You should read it.

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

#223

Post by ElProlactin »

huimang wrote: post #208
ElProlactin wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In your original comment, you stated: > It's astonishingly easy to not get shot: don't invade someone's home. The clear, plain-English implication of what you're suggesting is: your risk of getting shot (in the US) is, to a large extent, directly correlated to your invasion of other people's homes. Except that there's no evidence to support this. According to FBI data from 2015-2019, the ratio of criminal gun homicid…

Is the context of this discussion unclear to you? Do I need to place conversational guard clauses for you? Or are you just interested in nitpicking? Do I really need to clarify that there are other ways of dying or getting harmed, including other ways of being shot, that have nothing to do with this? Do I have to preface every comment with an obvious disclaimer? Obvious disclaimer: It is completely obvious that freak…

> Obvious disclaimer: It is completely obvious that freak incidents occur...

Are you really now characterizing incidents of gun violence and suicide as "freak incidents"? They just happen, like a random bolt of lightning in a clear sky that strikes a person out taking a walk?

> Out of a population of 349,000,000 people. Sad, but most people can live their lives and be completely unaffected. Stop being sensationalist.

The figure I cited was for gunshot deaths of innocent people. Every year, over 100,000 people are shot in the US. More Americans die every year due to guns than they do because of auto accidents.

You can dismiss this as miniscule compared to the size of the population, and refuse to compare the numbers in the US to other developed nations, which shows how absurdly more risky the US is versus the rest of the "civilized world".

But what you can't do is pretend that gun violence doesn't have an impact on people that isn't measured in deaths and gunshot victims. Because there is plenty of evidence that the threat of gun violence has a major impact on the lives of Americans. For example, more than a third of Americans have avoided going to certain public places or events out of fear. See: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/40205802/

Other statistics, with citations, that I'm sure you'd dismiss:

https://giffords.org/lawcenter/resources/gun-violence-statis...

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

#225

Post by huimang »

ElProlactin wrote: post #223
huimang wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is the context of this discussion unclear to you? Do I need to place conversational guard clauses for you? Or are you just interested in nitpicking? Do I really need to clarify that there are other ways of dying or getting harmed, including other ways of being shot, that have nothing to do with this? Do I have to preface every comment with an obvious disclaimer? Obvious disclaimer: It is completely obvious that freak…

> Obvious disclaimer: It is completely obvious that freak incidents occur... Are you really now characterizing incidents of gun violence and suicide as "freak incidents"? They just happen, like a random bolt of lightning in a clear sky that strikes a person out taking a walk? > Out of a population of 349,000,000 people. Sad, but most people can live their lives and be completely unaffected. Stop being sensationalist.…

> Are you really now characterizing incidents of gun violence and suicide as "freak incidents"?

Yup, as they basically are. Bolts of lighting would fall under "random acts of god/nature". Talking about whether or not guns should legally be ownable by citizens is an entirely different discussion.

> Every year, over 100,000 people are shot in the US. More Americans die every year due to guns than they do because of auto accidents.

Again, over 349,000,000 people. You do the math. Tons of car accidents, yet the world moves on and literally every adult I know, who doesn't live in Chicago/NYC/[rare place that's walkable + can afford it], drives. Find someone or something to blame for the geography of the country. Are we debating infrastructure now for a country the size of the US?

In any case, it does seem that you are capable of understanding what I meant by the original statement. It seems like all you want is to quibble over slight semantics in phrasing, and lecture someone who actually has lived in the US about how dangerous it really is. Have a day.

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

#226

Post by zimpenfish »

oopsieDayz wrote: post #171
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.

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.

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

Unless that someone is a cop, of course.

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

#227

Post by zimpenfish »

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.

> I’ve lived in a bunch of European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation.

Presumably not the UK?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer)

"Anthony Edward Martin was an English farmer who shot two burglars in his home [...] was convicted of murder, which was later reduced to manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility"

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

#228

Post by NuclearPM »

crote wrote: post #164
dmurray wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Afraid for your life if you were to confront the thief . That reasonably covers pretty much all cases, especially in a state where lots of people have guns.

In other words: don't be an idiot and call the cops instead. That's what they are supposed to be for!

Texas cops? The ones that stop parents from saving their children during school shootings?

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

#229

Post by mcmcmc »

alex43578 wrote: post #201
awolf wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not about your vehicle being seen in public at a single point in time, it's the fact that this system captures everyone's patterns of life. School, doctor, shooting range, church, play, protest. When, when, how often. All tracked and packaged up in a commercial database, without warrant or justification. If you happened upon me on a public street, I'd say "that I'm here on this street now is not private informat…

Is the same outrage present for your cell-carrier, credit card issuer, email provider, and the dozen other data-collecting orgs you assumably interact with throughout the day? They've built a more comprehensive pattern of life on you than a few points in the city you may have driven past. All that is subject to search and all of it is being sold now to random people. The panic over Flock is silly unless you're alread…

> Is the same outrage present for your cell-carrier, credit card issuer, email provider, and the dozen other data-collecting orgs you assumably interact with throughout the day?

All of these require a search warrant.

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

#230

Post by giaour »

zimpenfish wrote: post #227
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.

> I’ve lived in a bunch of European countries and in none would you be charged with murder in that situation. Presumably not the UK? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Martin_(farmer) "Anthony Edward Martin was an English farmer who shot two burglars in his home [...] was convicted of murder, which was later reduced to manslaughter on grounds of diminished responsibility"

Where exactly is the imminent threat of deadly force in that example?
Post reply on HN