5 ms·

I don't find scraping publicly accessible data nearly as bad as when they circle planes over protests and track people. Not just the marshals service, but FBI[1

by cronix 3y ago

I don't find scraping publicly accessible data nearly as bad as when they circle planes over protests and track people. Not just the marshals service, but FBI[1] and even the US Air Force[2], etc. A prime example of this was during the riots in Kenosha, WI in 2020, and the subsequent trial of Kyle Rittenhouse. A good deal of the footage they used in the trial was from the FBI surveillance plane[3], and they supplied low resolution footage, but had all persons involved clearly marked and tracked. What they actually have is much clearer than what they provided to the lawyers under subpoena. Combine that with cell phone data, and trackers they manually place on "suspects" and their cars[4]. [1] https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3zvwj/military-fbi-flying-surveillance-planes-george-floyd-protesters https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3zvwj/military-fbi-flying-s... [2] https://theintercept.com/2020/07/23/air-force-surveillance-plane-portland-protests/ https://theintercept.com/2020/07/23/air-force-surveillance-p... [3] https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/03/us/kyle-rittenhouse-trial/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/03/us/kyle-rittenhouse-trial/ind... [4] https://www.kgw.com/article/news/investigations/mysterious-plane-linked-to-federal-agents-flew-over-protesters-in-portland-st-louis/283-ffc54628-980a-432c-a2c7-f9d7f161ff4d https://www.kgw.com/article/news/investigations/mysterious-p...

nostromo 3y ago
Monitoring an active riot seems pretty much what I’d expect the FBI to do. It doesn’t seem that there was any intimidation of peaceful protesters, which obviously would be concerning.
- sangnoir 3y ago
  > Monitoring an active riot seems pretty much what I’d expect the FBI to do. What - if any - is the difference between a riot and a protest?
  - bombcar 3y ago
    Which side you’re on. If they’re for what you support, they’re freedom lovers protesting the evils of the totalitarian government. If they’re against what you support, they’re evil thugs rioting to overthrow the rightful government.
  - nostromo 3y ago
    If you're starting buildings on fire, that's probably a riot.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      "You" is a nebulous term during any mass action. If provocateurs[1] can unilaterally turn a legitimate protest into a "riot" in a way that materially changes the rules of engagment, i.e. if a single anonymous person among thousands can instantly change a constitutionally protected activity into a crime for everyone present, then having a legally defined distinction that is easily subvertible may not be a great idea. Nevermind the fact that guilt-by-physical-proximity-to-a-criminal is a legally-dubious concept. 1. Embedded counter-protesters or undercover law enforcement
  - 1123581321 3y ago
    In the US, a protest is organized, but not violent and doesn’t disturb the peace.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      In a group of 100 - if one person is violent, and the other 99 are peaceful would that be a protest or a riot? What is violence? Throwing an egg? Ice cream, rocks?
      - 1123581321 3y ago
        That would be a protest. There are crimes called assault and battery in the US that are for individuals acting violently, and they can be committed with a pretty wide variety of items. There is also a crime called 'inciting a riot' that can get you in trouble for trying to turn a protest violent even if you didn't try to hurt anyone yourself. What is violence is definitely an interesting question, but the decision-making process used by police keeping a protest peaceful, and the charges that can be applied afterwards when a protest goes wrong, have a lot of case law and precedent established.
        sangnoir 3y ago
        > That would be a protest. There are crimes called assault and battery in the US that are for individuals acting violently, and they can be committed with a pretty wide variety of items So if a building is burnt down, it could be an arson at a site of protest, rather than automatically becoming a riot? Is it criminal for police to try and incite violence at an otherwise peaceful protest? If they are successful in provoking violence, can they then legally disperse everyone?
        1123581321 3y ago
        An individual act of arson not disrupting or a protest or turning it violent is possible, sure. It's illegal for police to deliberately ruin a protest. The right to protest is ultimately defended by the US constitution's first amendment (free speech) and there are federal, state and local laws and policies that stem from that.
  - josephcsible 3y ago
    > What - if any - is the difference between a riot and a protest? Whether people are being intentionally injured and property is being intentionally damaged/stolen.
    - sangnoir 3y ago
      > Whether people are being intentionally injured and property is being intentionally damaged/stolen. If this sufficient to revoke 1A rights, does it also apply to 2A?
      - josephcsible 3y ago
        I don't think that's sufficient to revoke 1A rights. I think the people who do those bad things should get locked up in jail, and any remaining actual peaceful protesters should get to continue protesting.
  - ls612 3y ago
    The quantity of violence involved. A protest should have rounds-to-zero of it.

by cronix 3y ago

nostromo 3y ago

Monitoring an active riot seems pretty much what I’d expect the FBI to do. It doesn’t seem that there was any intimidation of peaceful protesters, which obviously would be concerning.

sangnoir 3y ago
> Monitoring an active riot seems pretty much what I’d expect the FBI to do. What - if any - is the difference between a riot and a protest?
- bombcar 3y ago
  Which side you’re on. If they’re for what you support, they’re freedom lovers protesting the evils of the totalitarian government. If they’re against what you support, they’re evil thugs rioting to overthrow the rightful government.
- nostromo 3y ago
  If you're starting buildings on fire, that's probably a riot.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    "You" is a nebulous term during any mass action. If provocateurs[1] can unilaterally turn a legitimate protest into a "riot" in a way that materially changes the rules of engagment, i.e. if a single anonymous person among thousands can instantly change a constitutionally protected activity into a crime for everyone present, then having a legally defined distinction that is easily subvertible may not be a great idea. Nevermind the fact that guilt-by-physical-proximity-to-a-criminal is a legally-dubious concept. 1. Embedded counter-protesters or undercover law enforcement
- 1123581321 3y ago
  In the US, a protest is organized, but not violent and doesn’t disturb the peace.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    In a group of 100 - if one person is violent, and the other 99 are peaceful would that be a protest or a riot? What is violence? Throwing an egg? Ice cream, rocks?
    - 1123581321 3y ago
      That would be a protest. There are crimes called assault and battery in the US that are for individuals acting violently, and they can be committed with a pretty wide variety of items. There is also a crime called 'inciting a riot' that can get you in trouble for trying to turn a protest violent even if you didn't try to hurt anyone yourself. What is violence is definitely an interesting question, but the decision-making process used by police keeping a protest peaceful, and the charges that can be applied afterwards when a protest goes wrong, have a lot of case law and precedent established.
      - sangnoir 3y ago
        > That would be a protest. There are crimes called assault and battery in the US that are for individuals acting violently, and they can be committed with a pretty wide variety of items So if a building is burnt down, it could be an arson at a site of protest, rather than automatically becoming a riot? Is it criminal for police to try and incite violence at an otherwise peaceful protest? If they are successful in provoking violence, can they then legally disperse everyone?
        1123581321 3y ago
        An individual act of arson not disrupting or a protest or turning it violent is possible, sure. It's illegal for police to deliberately ruin a protest. The right to protest is ultimately defended by the US constitution's first amendment (free speech) and there are federal, state and local laws and policies that stem from that.
- josephcsible 3y ago
  > What - if any - is the difference between a riot and a protest? Whether people are being intentionally injured and property is being intentionally damaged/stolen.
  - sangnoir 3y ago
    > Whether people are being intentionally injured and property is being intentionally damaged/stolen. If this sufficient to revoke 1A rights, does it also apply to 2A?
    - josephcsible 3y ago
      I don't think that's sufficient to revoke 1A rights. I think the people who do those bad things should get locked up in jail, and any remaining actual peaceful protesters should get to continue protesting.
- ls612 3y ago
  The quantity of violence involved. A protest should have rounds-to-zero of it.