271–277 of 277 posts
Community note: it is my understanding, based on teardowns that I've found online, that Flock cameras should be assumed to contain a cellular modem and at least one GPS receiver. At least some have been found to contain an addition, obfuscated GPS receiver.
Dog whistle!
Thanks, senior autism, whatever would we have done without you.
Oh, and that's sarcasm, by the way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That is because we are moving away from Democracy and rule of law and towards Feudalism and aristocracy. In such a system, the law is not blind but it is applied depending on the accused social status. Feudalism is not a good goverment system to produce wealth nor well-being. It is very good at concentrating the diminishing wealth in a few hands, thou.
[flagged]
Did people elected officials to not enforce the law? Or did people elected officials because they though they will be the law-and-order (even if they were mistaken)? That are two very different things.
People make mistakes, misinformation exists, to think that once a goverment is elected that gives them the authority to do whatever they want is not understanding how constitutions and separation of power work. There are safeguards in place to avoid elected officials to become dictators (because the country founders know that someone will try).
Is there a good public list of Flock Safety cities? Would be particularly interesting to see where they are in blue states.
You can search for cities' transparency portals. Not sure if every Flock customer has one though. site:transparency.flocksafety.com
In my county, multiple law enforcement agencies are not on Flock's transparency portal, despite posting fairly regularly on FB about "responding to a Flock hit on a vehicle".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The difference is that people are fans of Luigi Mangione because he enforced a punishment for what people feel should be illegal . You're trying to paint vigilante justice with the same brush as lawlessness, when in fact it's the opposite. One is breaking the law to punish someone that the law failed to, the other is breaking the law to avoid punishment. The CEO caused vast death and suffering with the policies he en…
> The CEO caused vast death and suffering with the policies he enacted in the name of profit, yet the law didn't touch him. If the CEO caused someone to die indirectly, how much more did the doctors involved cause people to die by refusing to schedule and perform procedures for free? They didn't.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
While I can see your point about "strangle a baby", I don't think there are any events that unfolded like that. If someone shows up and asks me for something they technically aren't supposed to have, how am I supposed to know that?
> If someone shows up and asks me for something they technically aren't supposed to have, how am I supposed to know Well, in this case, you know because "you" happen to be a ~$3.5b company with a legal department that already works regularly on negotiations and compliance to state/local rules, and likely months to calmly investigate and decide on a policy. Has Flock Security made any statements claiming they were tri…
But if some federal agents show up & ask for some data then you respond with "sure, let me just run this by legal" they might just follow up with "OK, take a few days if you need to. The DoJ has really been breathing down our backs to go over these mortgage documents you signed last year. We can use this time to do that"
Replace your mortage with your daughter, brother-in-law, cousin, or whatever family member you prefer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is so abundantly hilarious to read. Cooperating with the Federal government cannot plausibly be a crime in the United States. It'd be like if I was sentenced to a Federal pentitiary, reported in to serve my sentence and was then found guilty of collaboration with the Federal government in some state court. Realistically if Flock didn't cooperate, the Federal government would just show up with a warrant, subpoena…
What does the contract or the law say? The “Feds asked nicely” doesn’t change the law. I worked for a company that processed state income tax data. Improper disclosure was a felony punishable by 5 years in prison. Regulating interstate commerce doesn’t give the content the power to renegotiate state contracts or dismiss state law.
If it didn't give the federal government this power then every state would just pass a "nuh uh!" law every time the federal added a tax or whatever to stuff.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Most likely the feds said they will tie up whoever challenges them in federal court. They can play jurisdiction fuck fuck games and then flip between it being a search, it being necessary for safety, that the city/county was obstruction a federal investigation, and all other nonsense. This sounds like some sort of legal procedures adopted from the USSR.
It isn't just USSR, it is the core Russian principle of "oprichnina" - you can violate any laws, human or God's, as long as you're serving the tzar, Secretary General or President Putin. We start to see a hint of it here with ICE, and i'm sure we'll see a bit more of it with the newly formed Domestic Terrorism Task Force.