Flock can't seem to take no for an answer, as its cameras reappear in another city that rejected them
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
bigreddyde
Posts: 115 +42
bigreddyde
Posts: 115 +42
bigreddyde
Posts: 115 +42
The rest of us don't care what "someone" wanted.
What does licking boots have to do with acknowledging felony vandalism?
And why do people who are against law and order always talk about foot fetishes when discussing people who believe laws should be abided by.
So the braindead or both parties and you.
Those very few occurrences, when they are caught are being prosecuted.
ok. I’m done.
You’re just a troll looking to feed your ego with childish comebacks.
Clearly all you want to is bash people in the head with your little fantasy world.
And talk about your love for feet.
bigreddyde
Posts: 115 +42
The people don't want it.
The people said "no."
That means NO...
Flock can fk off...
bigreddyde
Posts: 115 +42
Fine by me.
Enjoy the taste of dirty leather...
Insular thinking. Many governments have multiple arms that can make contracts without outside approval. A park district, public works, police, revenue, etc. If Flock hardware appears in some place, it's not because Flock employees went there to secretly install it, it's because someone wanted it.
See above, exactly correct. This kind of stuff (one branch not knowing) happens all the time. From the smallest HOA, to national governments, to international bodies such as the UN, NATO, and BRICS.
bigreddyde
Posts: 115 +42
The US government is supposed to be representative. If the government goes against the will of the people in domestic affairs then they have violated the Constitution.
Any clue what the founders would have to say about this?
Hint it involves the number 2...
acrossthestars
Posts: 405 +364
If we were a high-trust, law-and-order society of well-behaved, well-mannered citizens who respect each other's autonomy and judgement, and not the brain dead homunculi we apparently are—who let just any hooligans through the front gates of our fortress, under the guise of altruisitic empathy, without checking who was let in—then the cameras wouldn't even be needed.
You understand this, right? Like, you comprehend the difference between bodily autonomy and government autocracy, or are you feigning ignorance in some vain attempt to subvert the rule of law because you have a different idea about things "aught" to be run?
Make no mistake: I believe that we should allow foreigners into our country, but our current "blank check" policy of allowing ourselves to blindly accept anyone, on the grounds of racial and ethnic bias if we were more selective, has got to stop. Character, not creed, is what counts. We ignore this simple reality at our own peril.
Last edited:
You’re wrong on three points.
1, an elected government is done so to represent the people. If you don’t like their choices, vote them out; that is if enough people agree with you.
That different sections of a government make contracts without having to inform all others is exactly the way it’s designed to work. The NYT, NYP, and WSJ have all stated that in some cases where this situation happened, it was internal communications breakdowns, not flock doing anything wrong.
2, how to deal with government failing to represent the majority depends on the level of government, in this country. You have options from recall to impeachment, to no recourse at all. If by constitution you mean federal, I just described the recourse. Same for most but not all states. Impeach. Some states have recall systems in place as well or as the alternative. Any system lower than that, constitutions are rare.
3, you are in the minority of the “will of the people”. The only places where apr cameras are fought by any minimal majority (even here it’s rarely above 60% against, often barely 50%), is in ultra-liberal urban areas. Or where any sort of polling questioner was created by such people to be intentionally short worded or confusing.
The vast majority of the country’s communities either support aprs or don’t care.
You may have the population as a whole, barely. That’s because 90% of the population lives on 10% of the land. And that 10% is often far left leaning.
Even if you manage to ban them in your cities, you will face them elsewhere with no choice but to deal with it.
The west coast and New York may even be able to ban them at the state level since the urban areas are so extremely dense. But it will never happen in the majority of the country. Not by state congress or by ballot measure, and any attempt will be quickly reversed by a high court.
Bottom line: your complaints fall on deaf ears. Your tears, cry me a river. And your feelings, 90% of the country’s communities don’t agree.
So fight all you want locally. And never leave your little bubble. These are going to go up, one way or another, across the country.
And as a proven and well documented response to one group treading on another, even if you take down the public cameras, those that support them will install them privately. On private land. That films private and public spaces.
And for more than 40 years the SCOTUS has ruled every Time that you have zero expectation of privacy in public and that public-facing private cameras on private property cannot be blocked. As well that a private camera filming the public in any location is legal and cannot be blocked.
There are very few exceptions.
As for the founders, your case is dismissed. Your claim of any constitutional issue has no factual basis. If you have any issues go, file a claim with your HOA, town, county, state. Maybe you can find enough people to back you.
Otherwise vote. For people that agree with you.
It’s really that simple. Don’t forget, leave your bubble and those cameras are watching you. Oh, and even in your bubble, keep in mind there are people like me. With security cameras. With car cameras: mine the exact setup ruled legal by a federal appeals court. 24/7 360• Recording in car drive and online cloud, with a 72 hour rollover. Speed, time, and gps location stamped.
I see a crime I send the footage to both the locations’ local police, and the sheriffs department.
You call me a boot licker. That implies subservience. Reality check. We’re not boot lickers, we’re actively and willingly participating in stopping criminals.
And if my many posts fail to make it clear for you I’ll say it right up front: I don’t give a damn about your privacy in public. I agree with decades of court rulings that you have no expectation of privacy in public. Not even when you are private and visible by the public.
Well, all done schooling you. Have a nice day. Don’t forget your aluminium hat. We’re all scanning your brain waves right?!?
No, I get where you are going. People are the problem.
Just have a different opinion on it, and how to deal with it maybe.
I agree.
But you have no character of standing if you enter illegally.
My entire birth family are immigrants. Every generation fought at war for this country. Many of my family have died Since 1704. We even fought on both sides of the civil war.
We all believe(d) in the American way and life.
But! And btw yes I’m white middle upper class and never denied or hid that.
My wife and her family are mixed heritage Asian (live there never been here). Most, of my inlaws have never been here. Many want to come. I’m not sure I want them to. Not to live, not to visit.
I’m moving permanently in the next year or so. Unlike the crying theatrical nonsense of public performers, all Democrats, I mean it. I’m sick and tired of the absolute nonsense and train wreck that is our government. For a long time. From both parties.
So for all: I voted for Trump, thrice. I voted for, and worked on the campaign for, Obama.
No political compass test has ever plotted me. Every one ever has failed. An error, uncharitable, or 0,0.
I believe in one thing in life beyond my love for wife and family: obey the law.
If you don’t like it change it.
Or move.
acrossthestars
Posts: 405 +364
"Obey the law" follows the presumption of "just law": made by well-adjusted, sensible people, for well-adjusted, sensible people. Our populace contains few and our governments seem to contain fewer. "Bad laws", ratified by malevolent people, are the true stress test: they are exercises of tension, power games played by the tyranny of the governing body, to test how much bullsh*t the "law-abiding citizen" will put up with before they break. If criminals are people who break the law and bad laws are basically designed to make crooks out of good people, what do you think happens when justice is stupid?
It ain't so easy to "obey the law", when immorality becomes legal precedent.
XP437
Posts: 39 +35
And apparently someone who can't see the problem with constant survelience.
None at all. I welcome it. Par for the course world wide.
Similar threads
