Live data from Hacker News

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

ipvm.com

241–250 of 382 posts

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

#241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Long sentences and reliable enforcement are complimentary. If you can reliably prosecute the repeat offenders you catch, and put them behind bars for a long time? You stop them from committing more crimes. The crime rate falls, and the amount of enforcement manpower you have available per crime rises. Making it easier to catch and prosecute the remaining offenders. Most of the low level crime isn't done by "a dumb de…

For violent crime sure. But for theft if you can just consistently recover the loss + a penalty it will do so much more to discourage it than simply raising the penalty.

That's for theft specifically. Most thefts are committed by repeat offenders.

You are making a very common mistake of assuming that criminals are prone to making good decisions.

If they were, they probably wouldn't offend the first time. And almost certainly wouldn't reoffend - once the costs of getting caught are clear to them.

"Consistently" is not very realistic without a way of making repeat offenders stop reoffending. You need the level of law enforcement to completely overpower the crime rate - and that means either getting better funded, better staffed, better equipped, more professional enforcement, or lowering crime rates. "We need to overfund the police" is expensive and unpopular, "we need to give the police more surveillance powers" is extremely unpopular, and there are very few ways of getting lower crime rates. Jail bars, however, are a proven one.

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

#242

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…

"Don't talk to the police, without your attorney present, under any circumstances whatsoever."

Oh but I did. Multiple times, without a lawyer ever, how shocking:

"Hey, my bicycle was stolen, I need to file it so I get insurance payout"

"Hey, this demonstration and the roadblock of yours for guarding it, will it be around for much longer?"

"Hey, nice weather, isn't it?"

(Misdirecting small talk, while they were searching for drugs on the road to a festival, but then didn't really check me)

"Yes I know I have to have a light with a bicycle, but the battery went out and it was a emergency now to go anyway"

(Did not had to pay a fine)

And countless other examples like this.

Also more serious ones.

"Yes, it was those neonazis who beat up my friend"

So .. I never cared much for this online advice, but then again I also don't live in the US. Maybe there they shoot and arrest anyone approaching them on general principle?

Well in my world, that was actually shaped a lot by anarchistic anti establishment people, I found that one can talk to cops as inhuman cops, then they will act like one, or you talk to them as humans and might be surprised that they reply as humans.

That doesn't mean, that there ain't lots of assholes on a power trip in uniforms, but the "never talk to them advice" assumes they all are. And this is just wrong and act as a self fullfilling prophecy.

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

#243
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people simply don't see themselves as being in zero-sum contests with the police. Yes, that is why they don't do it. It does not mean the advice is "terminally online". It is the advice coming from layers that deal with the system. Layers saying those things, online and offline, are not terminally online.

No, but online is where you see this advice being most commonly posted and repeated. Second-most might be in lawyer's offices, but a) most people don't interact with lawyers, especially not in the context of criminal investigations, and b) the lawyers themselves have a distorted view of this system, because they are almost always dealing with people who, for one reason or another, should not talk to the police.

Using "terminally online" for "the advice layers consistently give both online and offline but people don't follow" is, imo, using that term incorrectly. "Terminally online" is derogatory term which involves you doing or thinking something insane. If literal layers give that advice in their literal offices and wherever they go around, it is simply "rarely followed advice".

And I will also claim that layers have way less distorted view of the system then us, people whose view of the system is based on movies and rare cases that hit the news.

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

#244
post #96

> He characterizes the behavior as rare. He simultaneously identifies it as the most common form of abuse. The tension between those two statements is the problem Flock has left unaddressed. I don’t see how there’s any tension between these statements. The overall occurrence of abuse can be rare while the most common form of the abuse that does occur is of officers tracking people they know.

[deleted]

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

#245

Warrants are needed, and much more transparency. These platforms should be monitored and policed aggressively to keep everybody honest. There's a precedent for this with for example body cam footage means it's now much easier to audit police conduct. Surveillance technology potentially enables a lot of abuse if used without checks and balances. But the same technology also enables monitoring for abuse. Use of surveil…

These platforms shouldn't exist to begin with... "land of the free" LOL!

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

#246
post #38

Remember that scene from "Men in Black" where K watches surveillance video feed of his ex? In the movie it was meant to be wistful and cute, I guess. Now that such systems are getting closer to reality, you realize the potential for abuse in enormous.

More like his widow than his ex - he was unable to ever contact her, which is what made it cute rather than creepy.

Someone stalking you is not cute even if they don't try to talk to you

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

#247
post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

>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.

This is a deeply masculine take, Zuck would be proud.

This is such a widely known problem, I’m really surprised you’re not familiar with it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Officer-involved_domestic_viol...

“Never date a cop” is very common advice women will give to each other, has nothing to do with politics or being excessively online.

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

#248

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is very doable when what you're dealing with is a Major Crime That Gets Full Institutional and Individual Attention. What about a bike theft, a jacked car or a stolen parcel though? There is a price to having information easily available to the law enforcement. There is a price to not having this information easily available to the law enforcement too.

The majority of crime is committed by a relatively small number of individuals. If citizens feel crime is out of control they need to vote in politicians and judges who sentence repeat offenders to long sentences or involuntary commitment.

Is that true? USA seems to have long sentences and a high incarceration rate, yet still has high crime when compared to other countries with less incarceration.

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

#249
post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

More like his widow than his ex - he was unable to ever contact her, which is what made it cute rather than creepy.

Someone stalking you is not cute even if they don't try to talk to you

Please explain that to the ad-tech industry…

Cancel that, they do try to talk to me every damn chance they get!

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

#250
post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people simply don't see themselves as being in zero-sum contests with the police. If you are in such a contest, those videos you've watched are quite useful and important. But when there's a hit and run on your block, expect your neighbors to go out of their way to volunteer information to the police. I've read threads here where people have made impassioned arguments that you yourself should never volunteer inf…

> Most people simply don't see themselves as being in zero-sum contests with the police. Yes, that is why they don't do it. It does not mean the advice is "terminally online". It is the advice coming from layers that deal with the system. Layers saying those things, online and offline, are not terminally online.

You mean "lawyers", right?
Post reply on HN