6 ms·
Texas Police Spent $4.5M on Four Chevy Tahoes
- randycupertino 3mo agoAnswer: Military Grade surveillance tech > Naturally, it wasn’t just $4.5 million for four 2026 Chevy Tahoes, though the SUVs themselves were still bizarrely expensive at $150,000 a piece. Here’s how the purchase order breaks down: - FalcoNet Core System (x4): $2,850,000 - Unlicensed FalcoNet core system: $200,000 - Delta 5G Perpetual license for FalcoNet V (x4): $280,000 - 2026 Chevrolet Tahoe (x4): $600,000 - FalcoNet Backpack core V2 – 6 x BTS (2G/3G/4G/5G): $355,500 - Flexable [sic] antenna kit: $27,000 - Cognyte PA Ranger: $105,000 - Unlicensed FalcoNet Backpack core V2 – 6 x BTS (2G/3G/4G/5G): $70,000 - Total PO Amount: $4,487,500
- ronsor 3mo agoEvery police station needs to be a mini-CIA, surely.
- WillPostForFood 3mo agoIt is 4 trucks for the state police, and it is a big state.
- OutOfHere 3mo agoMass surveillance is prohibited by the Constitution. The majority of the funds went toward it.
- fhdkweig 3mo agoState or federal constitution?
- OutOfHere 3mo agoIt is prohibited by the nation's Constitution which overrules all contained regions. The contained regions can add further restrictions, not lower them.
- fhdkweig 3mo agoI'm pretty sure that surveillance is not mentioned in the US Constitution. They didn't really have a concept of surveillance. Can you quote the line?
- deleted 3mo ago[deleted]
- OutOfHere 3mo agoThe Supreme Court has over multiple cases recognized that the collection of mass digital information can implicate Fourth Amendment protections. Here is the foundational line: > "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized." It clearly says: The right of the people to to be secure in their persons and effects against unreasonable searches shall not be violated.
- fhdkweig 3mo agoWell the problem comes down to what is considered "unreasonable searches". When I think "surveillance", I think cameras on cars that photograph everything they pass by. The courts have again and again considered those to be reasonable with no expectations of privacy. And the trucks in this article are doing exactly that.
- DangitBobby 3mo agoWireless cell communications have no expectation of privacy?
- alwa 3mo agoMaybe so, but four physical trucks, interpreting physical radio waves in their immediate vicinity, allocated across the whole state of Texas… that’s “targeted,” not “mass.”
- CWuestefeld 3mo agoI'm pretty sure you're misunderstanding the definition of "targeted". It has nothing to do with the total capacity of the system, it's about the ability differentiate a specific target from everything else. The design of these systems is the opposite of that: they're intended to intercept everything within their reach. The fact that with only four devices, their reach isn't (yet) so great has no bearing.
- alwa 3mo agoIt’s the “within their reach” that constitutes the targeting, it seems to me. Maybe “particularized scrutiny” is a better word? Each fancy radio can only be in one place at one time, and presumably with a human operator in the vehicle or wearing the backpack. Which emulates a cell station, not all tens of thousands of them in the state simultaneously. That feels much more like “DUI checkpoint checking all cars on this road at this time,” or “canvassing the neighborhood around the crime,” or “the stadium operator invited the cops into the security office to watch their CCTV feeds during the big game.” Precipitated on some reason—maybe not the specific human, but something that’s different about that place and time that warrants a human targeting their attention there. As opposed to the network-level, “all communications between all people all the time just in case” that constituted the “mass” surveillance that Snowden described (and Flock has since innovated and extended to the physical world).
- FireBeyond 3mo ago> Each fancy radio can only be in one place at one time 5G mid-band (let's go with the charitable option) has an effective range of up to 2miles. So no big deal, just all 5G communications within up to a 12sq mi circle surrounding the vehicle. Don't think that's exactly "targeted".
- nilamo 3mo ago4 trucks... That can intercept and record all nearby 5g traffic? That's not even useful for police lmao
- cucumber3732842 3mo agoYou'd think the real CIA would get pissy about these upstarts and stomp em.
- yourapostasy 3mo agoMaybe the Chevy Tahoes were priced as the initial capex, and a maintenance and support contract covering capex and opex for the next X years with a local dealership? I’ve sometimes seen this in corporate budgeting. Some companies prefer to lock in support and maintenance in advance for a more expensive fixed price instead of pay a variable but lower price over the same time period because of the budgeting vagaries that entails. Considering the amount of time and the number of expensive management staff involved in them I’ve seen some budgeting knife fights burn up, I see the logic.
- adverbly 3mo agoThe obvious question then becomes why 4 military-grade surveillance Tech Tahoes are needed. Was three not enough for the current demand for military grade surveillance by the police? Why is there so much demand for military grade surveillance? Is there a better way to address that core need? A million bucks buys a lot of essential services.
- troupo 3mo agoJohn Oliver did a report on militarization of police 11 years ago. It's only become worse since: https://youtu.be/KUdHIatS36A?is=C86HI8463VZnqjXU https://youtu.be/KUdHIatS36A?is=C86HI8463VZnqjXU
- fingerlocks 3mo agoAnd Radley Balko blogged about it every day 20 years ago before publishing a book in 2013 literally subtitled as The Militarization of America’s Police
- janderson215 3mo agoThe cartels have also militarized. Bit of a vicious cycle we’re in.
- FireBeyond 3mo agoYes, the cartels have always been at war with the Texas Department of Public Safety Criminal Investigation Division...
- janderson215 3mo agoYou say it sarcastically, but any law enforcement agency is an enemy of the cartels goals and therefore at risk in the event of intervention.
- FireBeyond 3mo ago
- bob1029 3mo agoI find it amusing how ineffective all of this stuff becomes if you simply leave your phone at home. No one is doing the hard kind of police work anymore.
- SoftTalker 3mo agoMost criminals are dumb, some of them not only carry their phones with them, they even post their crimes on social media. With that and Flock I would think police work has never been easier.
- entropie 3mo ago> Most criminals are dumb You mean most criminals who get caught?
- SoftTalker 3mo agoI think both can be true.
- flufluflufluffy 3mo agoBoth can be true but it’s unclear if both are true, and it also depends on what one considers “dumb”
- wat10000 3mo agoIt also depends on what you consider to be “criminal.” I’d wager most shoplifters are dumb. Most supervisors who engage in wage theft aren’t dumb. But that’s not the kind of person who comes to mind when we think “criminal.”
- lotsofpulp 3mo agoThere are two kinds of people in the world. Criminals, and criminals with plausible deniability.
- OutOfHere 3mo agoA core issue as I see it is that the police has too much money. Why are people willingly paying so much in taxes? Why don't people move to lower tax cities and counties? Granted, fines also contribute to their income. There are ways of lowering crime that don't require police militarization, some of which are covered in https://youtu.be/YJTPGu2E4qk https://youtu.be/YJTPGu2E4qk.
- mmooss 3mo agoIt's an interesting question: Isn't Texas widely marketed as a 'low tax area'? It may be a 'low income tax area', with more regressive taxes used to fund the state and an equal or higher total? Texans need to pay for the same things, generally, as people in Massachusetts (though maybe they don't invest as much in schools, health care, etc.).
- cucumber3732842 3mo agoYou vastly under-estimate how expensive social services programs are. The people of Texas can pay less have piles of money for 1984 equipped police cars and highschool football stadiums and other boondoggles by simply not having those programs. Is it the right thing to do? ehhh.... That said Texas isn't that low tax overall compared to a lot of other states. They have pretty oppressive property taxes.
- mike_bob 3mo agoAs a country, we spend nearly as much on domestic police (~$250B) as China does on their military each year. And from what I've seen, there is no correlation with increases in police spending and drops in crime rates. It's pretty disturbing if you think about it.
- eclipticplane 3mo agoIt's a mass jobs program with a powerful set of unions behind it.
- jmuguy 3mo ago
- pyuser583 3mo agoWait I read the memo - it said “duty of care.” That’s powerful rhetoric but really narrow and well defined legalese. I checked, and Texas police only have a duty of care in narrow situations: if someone requires emergency medical care, they must call an ambulance; if they are driving an emergency vehicle, they must do so safely. That’s about it. There’s no “general duty of care” obligation. Maybe they’re just using scary sounding language, or maybe this narrow clause is being interpreted to grant the police much larger powers. But “duty of care” is usually intended to hold someone accountable.
- NelsonMinar 3mo ago[flagged]
- wat10000 3mo agoExcept it was. They didn’t spend over $1 million/vehicle on stock Tahoes, but that’s what they cost when fully customized for this force.
- Catloafdev 3mo agoIf you read the rest of the article, it breaks down the cost, it's not a misleading title.
- ck2 3mo agoI realize this particular case is state level but at the federal level $21 TRILLION has been spent on militarization including police forces from 2001-2021 https://ips-dc.org/report-state-of-insecurity-cost-militarization-since-9-11/ https://ips-dc.org/report-state-of-insecurity-cost-militariz... enough is enough, it is beyond ridiculous, imagine how much food, clothing, shelter and healthcare that could have bought instead
- mindslight 3mo agoAnd what do we get for it? Cops that think they are in the military, acting as a hostile occupation force and killing our own citizens. Their personal urges should have led them to put up (join the actual military) or shut up (don't). Instead they were given an easier and safer option that requires all of the bravado of shooting fish in a barrel, so they took it.
- BobbyTables2 3mo agoI think the vast majority of the public has no comprehension of what a trillion even is. All the “*illions” are units they will never have to deal with in their personal lives. However, I suspect a family of four could start to understand $300k of cash they (and everyone they know) couldn’t have because the money was used for such purposes... Even over 20 years, that’s like a nice new car every other year… Sure, taxation isn’t uniform but this is an enormous amount of money!
- DivingForGold 3mo agoThis just adds fuel to the fire favoring police location apps, where users who spot police vehicles, in this case DPS vehicles post on their app and all app users receive notifications, so anybody nearby can turn off their cellphones - - or, "clam them up" in a ball of 50 layers of aluminum foil slit on the side. Of course, police will merely start placing hardware in inconspicuous vehicles then. What if there was a way to massively FLOOD these devices with spurious data though?
- bottle_roket 3mo agoIsn’t most of the data sent between your phone and the cell tower encrypted anyways? This would only catch voice calls and SMS right?
- throw1234567891 3mo agoThey do have their own BTS. If that BTS is the one strongest advertising itself to your phone (most often simply the closest one), your phone will connect to it.
- stasomatic 3mo agoThe new Miami police chief's salary is over $300K. I don't mind, fix this rathole, will ya?
- keepsmiling77 3mo ago[flagged]