5 ms·

Freedom requires both Liberty and Privacy. An all-seeing state will destroy Liberal society. Reform requires reform of both the government and industry. Indust

Freedom requires both Liberty and Privacy. An all-seeing state will destroy Liberal society. Reform requires reform of both the government and industry. Industry will happily gather the data and the state will then buy it from industry as a means to circumvent the 4th amendment. https://reason.com/2024/08/20/how-the-feds-buy-their-way-around-the-fourth-amendment/ https://reason.com/2024/08/20/how-the-feds-buy-their-way-aro...

Aloisius 2y ago
What does that have to do with this article? The police are getting warrants for the video.
- BenFranklin100 2y ago
  They aren’t getting warrants to tow the vehicles. They have no right to seize private property, especially the private property of someone not even involved with the crime in question. And what if the Tesla owner, as is their right or at least should be, refuses to release the video footage? How long do the police keep the illegally seized vehicle while the owner sorts out the seizure before the courts and at what personal cost? And what is prevents the police from obtaining the video through extrajudicial means? Does Tesla itself have access to the video? Can they sell/give it to the police? Are there legal safeguards against this or is it an open market as the linked Reason article shows? All of the above applies to any aftermarket camera security system as well. Also, if the police get access to the car data by some means, can they use any of the data to file separate charges against an uncooperative owner as retribution if they desire? There are many questions along these lines when dealing with an intrusive police state.
  - davidt84 2y ago
    > They aren't getting warrants to tow the vehicles. Um, FTA: > “Based on this information,” Godchaux wrote, “I respectfully request that a warrant is authorized to seize this vehicle from the La Quinta Inn parking lot so this vehicle’s surveillance footage may be searched via an additional search warrant at a secure location.”
    - BenFranklin100 2y ago
      I misspoke. They should no right to tow the private property of uninvolved individuals, warrant or no warrant. It is police overreach.
moate 2y ago
Freedom does not require Liberty because Freedom does not require the state. Liberties are granted, not natural, Freedoms. Freedom sounds great and people love to hype it, but doesn’t exist in a meaningful way in most advanced societies. If we’re going to use proper nouns, we need to use them properly.
- BenFranklin100 2y ago
  Go live in the remote wilderness in your cabin. The rest of this will live within civilized society with our necessary liberties, thank you very much.
  - moate 2y ago
    I advocate for no such thing but you want to have a discussion about things, you learn the vocabulary. It’s hard to talk about political theory when you use the words wrong just the same as someone calling the UI for Wordpress “the back end” makes it hard to have an engineering discussion. Liberties are fine, but don’t act like Freedom exists in modern society (or maybe any society) for the exact reason your flippant dismissal implies: the needs of other people. A poor invocation of Franklin indeed.

Aloisius 2y ago

What does that have to do with this article? The police are getting warrants for the video.

BenFranklin100 2y ago
They aren’t getting warrants to tow the vehicles. They have no right to seize private property, especially the private property of someone not even involved with the crime in question. And what if the Tesla owner, as is their right or at least should be, refuses to release the video footage? How long do the police keep the illegally seized vehicle while the owner sorts out the seizure before the courts and at what personal cost? And what is prevents the police from obtaining the video through extrajudicial means? Does Tesla itself have access to the video? Can they sell/give it to the police? Are there legal safeguards against this or is it an open market as the linked Reason article shows? All of the above applies to any aftermarket camera security system as well. Also, if the police get access to the car data by some means, can they use any of the data to file separate charges against an uncooperative owner as retribution if they desire? There are many questions along these lines when dealing with an intrusive police state.
- davidt84 2y ago
  > They aren't getting warrants to tow the vehicles. Um, FTA: > “Based on this information,” Godchaux wrote, “I respectfully request that a warrant is authorized to seize this vehicle from the La Quinta Inn parking lot so this vehicle’s surveillance footage may be searched via an additional search warrant at a secure location.”
  - BenFranklin100 2y ago
    I misspoke. They should no right to tow the private property of uninvolved individuals, warrant or no warrant. It is police overreach.

moate 2y ago

Freedom does not require Liberty because Freedom does not require the state. Liberties are granted, not natural, Freedoms. Freedom sounds great and people love to hype it, but doesn’t exist in a meaningful way in most advanced societies. If we’re going to use proper nouns, we need to use them properly.

BenFranklin100 2y ago
Go live in the remote wilderness in your cabin. The rest of this will live within civilized society with our necessary liberties, thank you very much.
- moate 2y ago
  I advocate for no such thing but you want to have a discussion about things, you learn the vocabulary. It’s hard to talk about political theory when you use the words wrong just the same as someone calling the UI for Wordpress “the back end” makes it hard to have an engineering discussion. Liberties are fine, but don’t act like Freedom exists in modern society (or maybe any society) for the exact reason your flippant dismissal implies: the needs of other people. A poor invocation of Franklin indeed.