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

Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

ipvm.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 382 posts

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#181

Post by goda90 »

boring_twenties wrote: post #158

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever. Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle that I can only wonder what, if anything, those people are thinking. Anyway, the key takeaway seems to don't date anyone who dates the police. Firstly, because it directly puts your own safety at risk, as…

Best hope you don't catch the eye of an officer even. Things can go poorly without a relationship, or even without a direct rejection.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#182

Post by tptacek »

boring_twenties wrote: post #158

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever. Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle that I can only wonder what, if anything, those people are thinking. Anyway, the key takeaway seems to don't date anyone who dates the police. Firstly, because it directly puts your own safety at risk, as…

This is an extremely online belief. Oak Park, IL, the inner-ring suburb of Chicago where I live, is almost certainly one of the 10 most progressive and left-leaning municipalities in the country. Oak Parkers (not me) have the opposite concern: we're below our threshold number of sworn officers, and desperate to add more. The median Oak Parker has very positive views of the police (and also all the standard progressive concerns about abuses.)

Lots of political beliefs are like this! There are plenty of things people believe very strongly, and get near universal reinforcement on in their communities, that don't survive contact with actual living grass. The median American has an extraordinarily high opinion of Amazon, for instance, something you'd never know unless you sought out polling (or, you know, took a walk down a residential block and looked at the stoops.)

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#183

Post by Manuel_D »

asveikau wrote: post #34
Manuel_D wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right and what if lots of crime happens in a place where there are not many businesses? Hardly an implausible scenario given that crime is bad for business. The city can set up its own camera for its own use. Is that really that wild of a proposal?

What if what if what if? That whole premise of "what if lots of crime happens" -- already false. Did you know that most places in America are at historically low crime rates in most of our lifetimes? It is garbage to say this needs deep societal focus right now. I don't give a shit about the hypothetical hurt feelings of small town cops whining that they don't have always-on spy equipment.

Historically low American crime rates are still several times higher than most of the developed world.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#184

Post by duld »

tptacek wrote: post #182
boring_twenties wrote: post #158

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever. Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle that I can only wonder what, if anything, those people are thinking. Anyway, the key takeaway seems to don't date anyone who dates the police. Firstly, because it directly puts your own safety at risk, as…

This is an extremely online belief. Oak Park, IL, the inner-ring suburb of Chicago where I live, is almost certainly one of the 10 most progressive and left-leaning municipalities in the country. Oak Parkers (not me) have the opposite concern: we're below our threshold number of sworn officers, and desperate to add more. The median Oak Parker has very positive views of the police (and also all the standard progressiv…

To clarify, you're stating that "Don't talk to the police" is an "extremely online belief"? Or were you referencing the dating portion of the comment?

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#185

Post by etchalon »

Manuel_D wrote: post #176
etchalon wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're going to Google a rebuttal to sound smart, please read the opinion before you do. The Ninth Circuit in US v Yang specifically did not rule on the applicability of Carpenter or whether ALPR's GPS database was sufficiently similar. It ruled Yang lacked standing to sue on those grounds because you don't have any expectation of privacy in a rental car after you've turned it in. It ... has absolutely nothing to…

But crucially, the police used the ALPR data without a warrant. Regardless of the rental car, the police did use ALPR data without a warrant and the court did allow that to be used in court. It's still a court that came down in favor of warrantless use of ALPR data, even if the situation around the overdue rental car might limit it's application more broadly.

... the entire point of the decision was whether a person has an expectation of privacy in a rental car outside of the rental period.

The court didn't come down in favor of warrantless use of ALPR data. It said that the defendant did not have standing to challenge the use of ALPR data, warrant or not, because said person had no expectation of privacy in a vehicle they had no legal claim to during the period the data covered.

FFS, the court, in the opinion, which you linked to prove you're smart, quoted, verbatim:

"We do not address the potential Fourth Amendment privacy interests that may be implicated by the warrantless use of this ALPR technology because we conclude that Yang does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the historical location data of the Yukon under the facts of this case."

You are deeply dishonest and exhausting.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#186

Post by tptacek »

duld wrote: post #184
tptacek wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is an extremely online belief. Oak Park, IL, the inner-ring suburb of Chicago where I live, is almost certainly one of the 10 most progressive and left-leaning municipalities in the country. Oak Parkers (not me) have the opposite concern: we're below our threshold number of sworn officers, and desperate to add more. The median Oak Parker has very positive views of the police (and also all the standard progressiv…

To clarify, you're stating that "Don't talk to the police" is an "extremely online belief"? Or were you referencing the dating portion of the comment?

Correct: "never talk to the police" is a very online belief. I watch people talk to police all the time. People go out of their way to do it.

I don't even know what to do with the "never date police officers" thing. Most police officers are married. It's a shift-work job, so they have high divorce rates, but they just remarry.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#187

Post by bigbadfeline »

arjie wrote: post #30

Ultimately, there’s a sort of homeostasis in people’s tolerance for crime. If you need video evidence for prosecution, those who want it prosecuted will produce video cameras. If you make warrants impossible to produce in a timely manner, the camera search will be warrant exempted. Attempts to damage state power to ensure crime isn’t prosecuted will be likely met with methods that are immune to them. Given the constr…

> Given the constraints we operate under, the ideal number of unsolved crimes is not zero and the ideal number of crimes committed using state apparatus is also not zero.

That statement doesn't make any sense. What's the ideal number? +Infinity? "Not zero" includes that too. There has to be a way to place a ceiling on the number, asking for a non-zero "ideal" doesn't do that, on the contrary, it hides the all important question of what will keep the numbers low enough.

Using this case an example, if the offender wasn't abusing the system hundreds of times in the span of 1.5 years, he would've never been caught. So, we don't even know the real, "non-zero", number of such cases. That's a big problem.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#188

Post by Manuel_D »

etchalon wrote: post #185
Manuel_D wrote: post #176

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But crucially, the police used the ALPR data without a warrant. Regardless of the rental car, the police did use ALPR data without a warrant and the court did allow that to be used in court. It's still a court that came down in favor of warrantless use of ALPR data, even if the situation around the overdue rental car might limit it's application more broadly.

... the entire point of the decision was whether a person has an expectation of privacy in a rental car outside of the rental period. The court didn't come down in favor of warrantless use of ALPR data. It said that the defendant did not have standing to challenge the use of ALPR data, warrant or not, because said person had no expectation of privacy in a vehicle they had no legal claim to during the period the data…

As I wrote in my comment the court did add a caveat that could limit how broadly this precedence gets applied. But at the end of the day:

1) The police did use ALPR data without a warrant.

2) The court upheld the use of ALPR data without a warrant in this case.

How widely this will get applied remains to be seen.

The court did not say that a warrant would be required had Yang not been in a rental car, which is what people seem to be implying.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#189

Post by stickfigure »

chmod775 wrote: post #46
Manuel_D wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right and what if lots of crime happens in a place where there are not many businesses? Hardly an implausible scenario given that crime is bad for business. The city can set up its own camera for its own use. Is that really that wild of a proposal?

What if lots of murders happened in bathrooms?

> What if lots of murders happened in bathrooms?

Then we would start putting cameras in bathrooms? Or start closing public bathrooms? Nobody wants to go into a bathroom and get murdered. We as a society are not going to just accept a high bathroom murder rate. Culture will adapt to reality, one way or another.

Re: Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed

#190

Post by s1artibartfast »

ultrarunner wrote: post #177
boring_twenties wrote: post #158

This shouldn't be hard to understand. Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever. Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle that I can only wonder what, if anything, those people are thinking. Anyway, the key takeaway seems to don't date anyone who dates the police. Firstly, because it directly puts your own safety at risk, as…

> Dating the police is just such an astoundingly egregious violation of this principle There are still quite a few people who think the police are the friendly government-provided customer service agents of life, although I've watched this viewpoint decline markedly over the last twenty years at least. Locally, a woman went on a hiking date with a Phoenix cop and wound up dead [0]. Notably, the woman was from New Eng…

[flagged]
Post reply on HN