311–320 of 382 posts
No, it shows that we have a destructive, trust undermining security industry that sells abusive surveillance software that by spirit of the law would be clearly illegal in any country that pretends to be a free and open society and has a constitution in the direction.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. They have also unusually high domestic violence rates. That is where the bit comes from.
So do firefighters.
The factors police have and firemen dont are a.) victim not being able to go to police, cause those are his buddies b.) training teaches cops to take and keep charge (escalating aggression until compliance is acquired).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 l…
Though: the validity of "nobody should ever talk to the police" is highly disputable. It assumes the only objective anybody would have in a police encounter is not being prosecuted. Prosecution is unlikely, and there are other important objectives.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
If you're so scared of your own shadow you'd tie a noose around your own neck and hand the other end to those in power in exchange for an illusion of safety, I won't stand in your way.
Build that cage around yourself and hope the jailer will be benevolent. Just don't drag others down with you. Some of us have decided to learn from history.
No, it shows that we have a destructive, trust undermining security industry that sells abusive surveillance software that by spirit of the law would be clearly illegal in any country that pretends to be a free and open society and has a constitution in the direction.
No, it shows that even trust has been utterly undermined by a police force that cannot control itself. This is just the latest in a long line of abuses, and completely eliminating Flock would not even touch the underlying problem.
No, it shows that we have a destructive, trust undermining security industry that sells abusive surveillance software that by spirit of the law would be clearly illegal in any country that pretends to be a free and open society and has a constitution in the direction.
No, it shows that even trust has been utterly undermined by a police force that cannot control itself. This is just the latest in a long line of abuses, and completely eliminating Flock would not even touch the underlying problem.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the city hires enough police officers, yes. It'd almost certainly require an unfathomably large budget, but it's not impossible. The point is, the plain view doctrine means the police don't need a warrant to record observation that are in plain view. The licence plates of cars on the street are in plain view. I really don't understand how people got this idea in their head that their license plates are private inf…
>If the city hires enough police officers, yes. It'd almost certainly require an unfathomably large budget, but it's not impossible. If the precedent was set based on this idea. It will fall apart with further scrutiny. >I really don't understand how people got this idea in their head that their license plates are private information . How do red light cameras identify cars? How does parking enforcement work? By reco…
Privacy laws are generally about protecting what you do in private, not in public. In the US, anyone can film you in public, government or otherwise.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So do firefighters.
This is first time I have seen the claim that firefighters have the same domestic violence rates as police. I have seen multiple studies on police vs regular citizens and police were more violent in all of them. I did not seen comparable numbers about firefighters. The factors police have and firemen dont are a.) victim not being able to go to police, cause those are his buddies b.) training teaches cops to take and…
The question in my mind is what people are expecting? What do they think this proves? Policing is a conflict focused job that involves violence so I wouldnt expect it to be the same as baseline to begin with.
I would caution against "just so" explainations. There are obviously lots of complex reasons and one can speculate a lot of stories one way or another.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The government may not purchase services for acts it is not allowed to do itself: Pinkerton Act.
But the government is allowed to track people's license plates. There's nothing against the law for a police officer to stand at an intersection writing down all passing car's license plates with a pen and paper. Flock is the same thing, just much more cost efficient.