7 ms·

Property damage is a crime. I don't object to Flock cameras or any other public cameras. But if I did, I would write to my congress person rather than commit a

Property damage is a crime. I don't object to Flock cameras or any other public cameras. But if I did, I would write to my congress person rather than commit a crime and destroy someone's property.

Sohcahtoa82 26d ago
The typical liberal "Bring a strongly-worded letter to a gun fight" approach. Chuck Schumer would be proud.
tastyfreeze 26d ago
Self governance means more that picking people to lord over you.
ungreased0675 26d ago
Writing a letter to your congressman does nothing.
gypsy_boots 26d ago
weak. There is a juggernaut of surveillance consuming everything in its path, where laws are skirted to install surveillance instruments and due process might as well not exist. And you're talking about "protecting property" and pulling out your little pen and paper to tell your congressperson "i'd like you to try this instead, please" I'm sorry, no. You don't necessarily have to be the one taking action in the streets, by all means write your letter, but please don't criticize others and pretend that your approach will get you any further than other peoples approach
- AlexandrB 26d ago
  This is a justification for any kind of vigilanteism. Is this also what you will tell armed righties who decide to round up illegal immigrants and shuttle them across the border to Mexico because the government is ignoring their concerns or is breaking the law because the government ignores you only reserved for your pet causes?
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 26d ago
    That is not inconsistent with a belief that violence against a person is worse than violence against property. It is odd to compare kidnapping a person with destroying their home security cameras.
  - antonvs 26d ago
    Democracy operates at multiple levels. You’ll notice that armed right wingers kidnapping people suspected of being undocumented is a problem confined to the government itself. There’s a reason for that. No-one really cares about immigrants, outside of performative politics, enough to take that personal risk. If they did, we’d find out what society’s reaction is. People are unlikely to look on that as favorably as they do on petty vandalism against an undemocratic rollout of a surveillance network.
    - JuniperMesos 26d ago
      There are definitely armed right wingers participating in vigilante immigration enforcement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Percenters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Percenters > Three Percenters have joined vigilante patrols along the U.S.–Mexico border https://azmirror.com/2024/05/23/border-vigilantes-are-blurring-the-lines-of-law-enforcement/ https://azmirror.com/2024/05/23/border-vigilantes-are-blurri... > On Jan. 20, just three days after Cade’s aid camp visit near Sasabe, another group assembled on a ridge overlooking the Rio Grande in Texas and stood over five seated migrants. Some of those standing were armed with long guns or pistols and one wore tactical gear; they questioned the migrants, all young men or boys, while filming them. But structurally, doing vigilante immigration enforcement is more difficult than doing vigilante destruction of property. Destroying a security camera takes one person doing one action one time; physically restraining a human being who doesn't want to be restrained and physically transporting them to the US border is a complex logistical operation that you really need the resources of a state-run bureaucracy in order to do. A vigilante group can't replicate it, unless it's so large and well-organized itself that it's a de-facto rival state to the legitimate US government, and this simply doesn't exist in the United States at this time.
- FireBeyond 26d ago
  It was like this in the face of some of the BLM protests. A notable group of people were saying: > It's terrible that an innocent black man died. But this property destruction has to stop! when, in reality, the perspective should be much more: "It's terrible that there is this property destruction. But these innocent deaths have to stop!" Hyperbole, some may some reading this, "We're talking about license plate readers[1], not people being shot or killed", but let's be real, there's very much a non-zero risk of that happening as a result of Flock-spawned encounters (and to be even more real, the culture from the top, as espoused very directly by its CEO is that false positives are a better outcome, and should be how the system works, rather than a false negative, because, ugh, "false negatives don't advance our mission to a world without crime, thanks to Flock"). [1] And they do far more than recognize license plates.
ydat 26d ago
> I would write to my congress person rather than commit a crime and destroy someone's property. Your congressman is having a nice steak dinner with representatives of the company while some poor staffer pastes the generic response in the letter sent back to you.
- JohnTHaller 26d ago
  Or getting their debts paid off by shady right-wing groups
hollywood_court 26d ago
Did Fox News tell you to write that?

Property damage is a crime. I don't object to Flock cameras or any other public cameras. But if I did, I would write to my congress person rather than commit a crime and destroy someone's property.

Sohcahtoa82 26d ago

The typical liberal "Bring a strongly-worded letter to a gun fight" approach. Chuck Schumer would be proud.

tastyfreeze 26d ago

Self governance means more that picking people to lord over you.

ungreased0675 26d ago

Writing a letter to your congressman does nothing.

gypsy_boots 26d ago

weak. There is a juggernaut of surveillance consuming everything in its path, where laws are skirted to install surveillance instruments and due process might as well not exist. And you're talking about "protecting property" and pulling out your little pen and paper to tell your congressperson "i'd like you to try this instead, please" I'm sorry, no. You don't necessarily have to be the one taking action in the streets, by all means write your letter, but please don't criticize others and pretend that your approach will get you any further than other peoples approach

AlexandrB 26d ago
This is a justification for any kind of vigilanteism. Is this also what you will tell armed righties who decide to round up illegal immigrants and shuttle them across the border to Mexico because the government is ignoring their concerns or is breaking the law because the government ignores you only reserved for your pet causes?
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 26d ago
  That is not inconsistent with a belief that violence against a person is worse than violence against property. It is odd to compare kidnapping a person with destroying their home security cameras.
- antonvs 26d ago
  Democracy operates at multiple levels. You’ll notice that armed right wingers kidnapping people suspected of being undocumented is a problem confined to the government itself. There’s a reason for that. No-one really cares about immigrants, outside of performative politics, enough to take that personal risk. If they did, we’d find out what society’s reaction is. People are unlikely to look on that as favorably as they do on petty vandalism against an undemocratic rollout of a surveillance network.
  - JuniperMesos 26d ago
    There are definitely armed right wingers participating in vigilante immigration enforcement: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Percenters https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Percenters > Three Percenters have joined vigilante patrols along the U.S.–Mexico border https://azmirror.com/2024/05/23/border-vigilantes-are-blurring-the-lines-of-law-enforcement/ https://azmirror.com/2024/05/23/border-vigilantes-are-blurri... > On Jan. 20, just three days after Cade’s aid camp visit near Sasabe, another group assembled on a ridge overlooking the Rio Grande in Texas and stood over five seated migrants. Some of those standing were armed with long guns or pistols and one wore tactical gear; they questioned the migrants, all young men or boys, while filming them. But structurally, doing vigilante immigration enforcement is more difficult than doing vigilante destruction of property. Destroying a security camera takes one person doing one action one time; physically restraining a human being who doesn't want to be restrained and physically transporting them to the US border is a complex logistical operation that you really need the resources of a state-run bureaucracy in order to do. A vigilante group can't replicate it, unless it's so large and well-organized itself that it's a de-facto rival state to the legitimate US government, and this simply doesn't exist in the United States at this time.
FireBeyond 26d ago
It was like this in the face of some of the BLM protests. A notable group of people were saying: > It's terrible that an innocent black man died. But this property destruction has to stop! when, in reality, the perspective should be much more: "It's terrible that there is this property destruction. But these innocent deaths have to stop!" Hyperbole, some may some reading this, "We're talking about license plate readers[1], not people being shot or killed", but let's be real, there's very much a non-zero risk of that happening as a result of Flock-spawned encounters (and to be even more real, the culture from the top, as espoused very directly by its CEO is that false positives are a better outcome, and should be how the system works, rather than a false negative, because, ugh, "false negatives don't advance our mission to a world without crime, thanks to Flock"). [1] And they do far more than recognize license plates.

ydat 26d ago

> I would write to my congress person rather than commit a crime and destroy someone's property. Your congressman is having a nice steak dinner with representatives of the company while some poor staffer pastes the generic response in the letter sent back to you.

JohnTHaller 26d ago
Or getting their debts paid off by shady right-wing groups

hollywood_court 26d ago

Did Fox News tell you to write that?