Flock Cameras

[JCsker]

He can’t because we have no options.

And there are options. Reflectivity is your friend if you so choose.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

I mean, I believe Nebraska is screwed, if only because of our incredibly conservative state. But states with a more neutral court system and supreme court could definitely challenge the legality and infringement of our basic rights.

...heavily used in California and New York.

 

[Scoop123]

He can’t because we have no options.

I don't get this thinking? Over 80 towns and cities, including Los Angeles, Denver, and Austin have rejected, let expire, or actively terminated their Flock camera agreements due to public pushback.

I'm not suggesting people become activist and march in the streets. Nah. But this one seems like there some clear paths that people have successfully done already. You attend a City Council meeting, or attend a Police Commissioner meeting if it came from them. The State legislature is another choice.

The ACLU has a campaign to "Get the Flock out" I'm not saying it's easy, but throwing up our hands on an issue that is not even legislated into law seems pretty surrender-ish (new word! lol).

 

[NikkiSixx]

...nobody likes it. Tell us what our options are.

Big problem in Palm Beach County.. vandals are cutting down the poles with electric angle grinders thankfully.

 

[huskat]

I did not post from a phone - never assume anything. And second, I have personally agreed to this arrangement with my phone company. I understand what it comes with when I sign up with the phone company.

I don't remember agreeing as a society, state or city to allowing Government to track every vehicle multiple times. Does that mean we must agree to it? Not sure - but it should be put in front of the public, not just assumed to be okay.

The thing is, I'm torn on the issue. I see the upside benefit, helps with crime, etc. But it's a slippery slope and those slopes often lead to government corruption and overstepping (which we are already seeing with Flock). It needs to be voted on and with parameters.

There is no expectation of privacy in the public. You are being watched, recorded, and tracked everywhere you go.

 

[Scoop123]

There is no expectation of privacy in the public.

Missing the point. I don't expect my license plate to be private or what shirt I'm wearing in public. The issue is not about being watched in public - the issue is what they do with the information they are gathering. This is the slippery slope problem. People shrug and say the cameras are fine. Then ONE guy in the city mandates they buy the cameras. They are installed without restrictions, laws or ordinances and the abuse flows. This is a major flaw and problem with these cameras just getting put on a pole and telling the public to deal with it..

The abuse has already been documented and is widespread. Some people throw up their hands and act like "oh well, cameras are in the public so everything is fair game" and then are surprised or care or don't pay attention when government officials and police are running queries without any cause at all. There is stalking, random searching, following people, etc, all sorts of BS going on.

 

[huskat]

Missing the point. I don't expect my license plate to be private or what shirt I'm wearing in public. The issue is not about being watched in public - the issue is what they do with the information they are gathering. This is the slippery slope problem. People shrug and say the cameras are fine. Then ONE guy in the city mandates they buy the cameras. They are installed without restrictions, laws or ordinances and the abuse flows. This is a major flaw and problem with these cameras just getting put on a pole and telling the public to deal with it..

The abuse has already been documented and is widespread. Some people throw up their hands and act like "oh well, cameras are in the public so everything is fair game" and then are surprised or care or don't pay attention when government officials and police are running queries without any cause at all. There is stalking, random searching, following people, etc, all sorts of BS going on.

Yes, abuse will always happen. There are some guardrails already in place, and we know that because abusers have been punished (officers fired, etc.). I am for expanding that punishment to be both civil and criminal if it isn't already...I honesetly don't know. Transparancy is key. For example, I would be interested in a system similar to unclaimed property in which you can query your name and information to see all executed searches about you or your property. Or the inverse, in which the entity that executed the search is required to notify you (of course, after any investigation is over, etc.).

 

[TruHusker]

I did not post from a phone - never assume anything. And second, I have personally agreed to this arrangement with my phone company. I understand what it comes with when I sign up with the phone company.

I don't remember agreeing as a society, state or city to allowing Government to track every vehicle multiple times. Does that mean we must agree to it? Not sure - but it should be put in front of the public, not just assumed to be okay.

The thing is, I'm torn on the issue. I see the upside benefit, helps with crime, etc. But it's a slippery slope and those slopes often lead to government corruption and overstepping (which we are already seeing with Flock). It needs to be voted on and with parameters.

I get your point but as I understand it. It’s a public space and anyone can video anyone else for anything at any time in a public space.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

My biggest worry regarding flock or any other kind of camera is that they'll catch me taking a pull on that 25 ouncer on my way home from a mountain bike adventure at Platte. I fear they gonna do like Target, and wait till it totals a certain amount, then move in for the kill.. gonna be hard to plead not guilty whey they show me 36 photographs of me actually doin it.

 

[dinglefritz]

Big problem in Palm Beach County.. vandals are cutting down the poles with electric angle grinders thankfully.

They’re stealing the wire and cameras.

 

[WHCSC]

Missing the point. I don't expect my license plate to be private or what shirt I'm wearing in public. The issue is not about being watched in public - the issue is what they do with the information they are gathering. This is the slippery slope problem. People shrug and say the cameras are fine. Then ONE guy in the city mandates they buy the cameras. They are installed without restrictions, laws or ordinances and the abuse flows. This is a major flaw and problem with these cameras just getting put on a pole and telling the public to deal with it..

The abuse has already been documented and is widespread. Some people throw up their hands and act like "oh well, cameras are in the public so everything is fair game" and then are surprised or care or don't pay attention when government officials and police are running queries without any cause at all. There is stalking, random searching, following people, etc, all sorts of BS going on.

What is the abuse you keep telling us about?

 

[gvillehorn]

What’s the point that I’m missing?

The point you’re missing is that privacy isn’t about having something to hide. It’s about not wanting a permanent, searchable record of where you go every day sitting in a database that thousands of agencies can query.

“I have nothing to hide” assumes the only people who need privacy are criminals, and that today’s rules will always govern the data. That’s not how these systems work. Flock doesn’t just check plates against a hot list and delete the rest. It logs every car, stores the data, and makes movement patterns searchable across a national network. Once that infrastructure exists, the uses expand. That’s the part people keep glossing over.