7 ms·

Cops Used Flock to Track a Man Across State Lines for a Pretextual Weed Search

331 points by cdrnsf 2mo ago

daun_gee 2mo ago
[dead]
- ux266478 2mo ago
  The farm bill he enacted in his first term was a pretty solid legalization middle ground. The fact he flipped around on it in his second term makes me think it's more accidental than anything.
rileymat2 2mo ago
I am misunderstanding the article, if "The searches came to light in a Wisconsin criminal complaint against Edward Abrams-Phillips, who was wanted for bail jumping on domestic violence charges." he was wanted, why do they need a pretext for the stop?
- jordanb 2mo ago
  > The bail jumping charge was dismissed; Abrams-Phillips was found guilty only of weed possession in the case, according to the court records. Apparently the bail jumping charge was weak? That seems like a black-and-white situation to me so no idea what the details were, but there was clearly something wrong with that charge. If the charge was so weak then they probably couldn't get a warrant to arrest him outright? Therefore they needed the marijuana probable cause to stop and search him. Regardless the disturbing part is that they're using surveillance state footage of a person traveling to a state where something is legal as "probable cause" for a crime.
  - ang_cire 2mo ago
    The bail jumping charge was actually dropped in the end, so weed possession was the only charge.
  - crooked-v 2mo ago
    Reading between the lines, I would bet the bail jumping charge was based on him crossing state lines back and forth, and was dismissed by the court when it became clear he wasn't actually running away anywhere. Thus the cops hunting for any and all petty bullshit to punish him with instead, like the marijuana possession.
    - jordanb 2mo ago
      That makes sense yes.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- tantalor 2mo ago
  The article is wrong on this point: the fact that he was crossing state lines was not a pretext for the stop. They actually wanted to add another charge. The cameras helped them find the right opportunity to do that. If they just picked him up driving around, they would only be able to charge those existing crimes. By waiting for him to cross state lines, they have a chance to add on another charge. They already had enough PC for the stop, and they could have searched the car as incident to the arrest at any time.
  - plorg 2mo ago
    Unless I'm misreading this is all covered explicitly in the article.
    - albedoa 2mo ago
      The article claims multiple times that the cops used the interstate travel as a pretext for the search that turned up the marijuana, but in most jurisdictions, the arrest would have allowed them to inventory the car anyway as part of the impound process. Unless this jurisdiction is an outlier, the pretext wasn't needed for the search. As the parent comment says, the cops used the interstate travel as a timing strategy to increase the charges.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
- garyfirestorm 2mo ago
  IANAL - if they break the bail conditions the judge may issue a warrant depending on severity, clearly a warrant was not issued here, otherwise there’s no need for pretext like you said. Article also states bail jumping charge was dismissed but the weed charge is the only charge that remains.
  - Muromec 2mo ago
    They still have to bother with actually going to a judge and actually getting that warrant. Why do that if you can just skip it and not deal with inconvenient questions.
    - saghm 2mo ago
      The Flock camera network is much less of a stickler for those pesky civil liberties being respected
- hwillis 2mo ago
  1. those charges were dismissed 2. the article address that specifically: > The case is an example of Flock cameras being used to arrest a wanted alleged criminal suspected of committing a violent crime. But it is also an example of police surveillance overreach *in that the cameras were specifically used to create a pretext to tack on additional petty crimes* based primarily on where a person’s vehicle had traveled.
  - bko 2mo ago
    I think using technology to capture alleged criminals is a good thing.
    - nemomarx 2mo ago
      does this work for any allegation? if it was a serious one surely they could get a warrant. if it's not enough for that it might as well be gossip imo.
      - FireBeyond 2mo ago
        According to Flock's CEO, yes. He has stated he sees a false positive as a better outcome than a false negative.
        bko 2mo ago
        Flock provides technology. They don't set the laws. It's like complaining about the CEO of Ford bc a police Ford vehicle damaged some property
        antonvs 2mo ago
        Flock provides tools and information that influence and encourage bad behavior from police. Yes, we need laws to help stop this. Ideally, those laws should entirely destroy Flock's business model and lead to its bankruptcy. The issue is not whether cameras are useful for law enforcement. The issue is how that camera information is managed and overseen. What Flock is doing would fit right in in a cartoon authoritarian state, but it doesn't belong in the real world.
- fusslo 2mo ago
  Ok, the article is confusing but the complaint is a little better. > The vehicle was registered to Edward 12-01-1993. Edward had an active Brown County felony warrant with nationwide extradition. so he wasn't just wanted but also had an active warrant. > Multiple Deputies checked the area but were unable to locate the vehicle at that time Police tried arresting him before, but couldn't find him. The police then used flock to find a pattern of coming/going over the state line. I'm guessing they stationed someone nearby to wait for a flock alert and arrest him. The following is total speculation on my part: The police are including the "Based on prior flock hits, the vehicle travels to Michigan frequently which is a known source State for Marijuana as it is legal there." to build probable cause for searching the car and finding the marijuana. Otherwise the only PC is: "He declined consent to search his vehicle. However, DeputyKowalski informed him he would be conducting a search of his vehicle due to the odor of marijuana". Maybe the olfactory skills of officers are so dubious that courts need more facts than just an odor? That'd be my guess. direct link to the complaint (it's also embedded in the article) https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/28537132/2025cf000671comp6522626-1.pdf https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/28537132/2025cf000671...
  - mixdup 2mo ago
    They don't need probable cause to search his vehicle if he had a warrant. They can search his car because they are arresting him and towing the vehicle
    - cogman10 2mo ago
      > They don't need probable cause to search his vehicle if he had a warrant. Incorrect. Warrants have to be specific. An arrest warrant is not a general search warrant (in fact, general search warrants aren't legal). You don't lose your rights because a cop is arresting you. Now, what can happen (and probably would happen) is the cops can take a drug sniffing dog to the car when it goes to impound and while the owner isn't there and claim "Oh, the dog signaled on the car so we searched it".
      - jimt1234 2mo ago
MSFT_Edging 2mo ago
This is the big problem with mass surveillance as a whole. With enough time, they'll find some pretext to bring you in, even if the original crime they want you for is weak. This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down. Lives will be completely derailed, police and judges will not be held accountable. The wrongful arrestees will still be in debt to the local jail and court for various fees they racked up. Trust in the justice system will continue to degrade and more and more violence will be used against people to maintain order. We hold police to high standards for search/arrest because they have the monopoly on violence. Even if they're wrong, you can't shoot back. Even if they're slamming your loved ones into the pavement, breaking their teeth, you cannot kick the cop in the head or else they have permission to murder you both. Mass surveillance is a loophole to this contract.
- cucumber3732842 2mo ago
  >This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down. Yes. That's exactly the point. Comply with every little thing, no matter how absurd, or else your life will unravel. Look through a historical comment (especially from back when "big data" was the buzzword) thread on any subject where HN is pro regulation and pro government. This is EXACTLY what the useful idiots want. They want some NYC liquor store owner to pay a hundred grand to the state because that one time he visited NH he loaded up his van with tax free henny to sell back home. They want that exurban undeveloped lot owner to lose their house for letting their buddy with a tree service dump there and fill in a few hundred square feet over the course of half a decade. They want some random industrial employer that makes nuts and bolts or something to be fined millions of dollars because their maintenance employees spray painted a piece of equipment in the parking lot without the PPE and pollution compliance measures befitting a commercial paint operation. They want the jackboot on the throat of everyone who steps out of line on any axis that they care about. They see the way the banking industry tries to stay away from weed, porn and guns because the upside isn't worth the risk of being combed over by the enforcers. And instead of seeing it as cautionary, they see it as a model that needs to be scaled down to the small businesses and the lowly individual peasants. Of course they don't lay it out so plainly. They use words like "negative externality" and "antisocial" and "dis-incentivize" to whitewash it but that doesn't change what it is.
CharlesW 2mo ago
Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-crime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-crime
Cider9986 2mo ago
Also Flock, in the past week: All of Winona Police Department's Flock cameras cut down and stolen https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49171656 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49171656 241 comments How Cops Are Trying to Hide Their Use of Flock https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49172076 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49172076 9 comments Flock's CEO Faced Me After Its Cameras Led to My Wrongful Stop https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49156650 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49156650 118 comments Flock – Chilling Effects: Long Island's Emerging Open-Air Prison https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49148541 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49148541 38 comments Leaked Flock Guide Shows How It Teaches Cops to Promote Its Tech https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158837 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158837 17 comments
- Windchaser 2mo ago
  Man outlines how hardened criminals take down Flock cameras, detailing it step-by-step: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1v78ihu/how_criminals_take_down_flock_cameras/ https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1v78ihu/...
  - willy_k 2mo ago
    Hopefully none of those hardened criminals know that a circular saw is the fastest way by far to cut through posts!
    - btbuildem 2mo ago
      Kickback would be bad if it binds in the kerf - I think sawzall is better/safer for cutting pipe that's under load.
  - LocalH 2mo ago
    You spelled "heroes" incorrectly.
    - NekkoDroid 2mo ago
Ccecil 2mo ago
Based on my observations (news reports, local chatter, etc) it seems that every state that borders a state with legal Cannabis does this. Idaho does this very frequently (since just about every border is a legal source). They take advantages of the bottlenecks on highways and have cameras and/or officers there. If it is Flock, interagency communications, license plate readers or just "enhanced stops" for things like a crack in the windshield. People seem to forget that while buying in one state is legal it actually can become a much larger crime than just possession as soon as you cross state lines. It "can" become a federal matter... This person in the article attracted the gaze of Sauron.
- WarmWash 2mo ago
  They did this in my state, and now that other state has been legal for over a year and a half, but the cameras are all still there
  - Ccecil 2mo ago
    North Idaho started adding license plate readers and cameras back in the early 2k's using funding given out after 9/11. Locally there was a recent pushback on them and the sheriff basically said "They've been there forever" and "Don't worry...it's just us with the footage"
- asdff 2mo ago
  They are making an assumption that someone is buying when they go into the dispensary. Not necessarily the case. They aren't compelled to buy anything when entering.
  - gwbas1c 2mo ago
    Which if you know that's the case, it's a good way to f*ck with the police. Travel to the dispensary and be empty handed when the search comes. After 2-3 searches you file a cease-and-desist.
TZubiri 2mo ago
I don't quite get the thesis of the author here. Regardless of the view that one may have on Cannabis laws, they are illegal, if the system is correctly detaining people that break those laws, and you have a problem with that, is the problem with the enforcement system or the law? If you don't like some aspect of this, should you be campaigning for removal of flock cameras? Or campaigning for cannabis rights and Controlled Substances reform?
- site-packages1 2mo ago
  The issue isn't prosecution for illegality, among other things it's the anti-Fourth-Amendment methods for constructing the case. So, I'm going to campaign for government entities to follow the Constitution (as amended).
  - TZubiri 2mo ago
    Which of the events would be in violation of the 4th amendment here?
    - rglover 2mo ago
      A reply to another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49189750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49189750
- forlorn_mammoth 2mo ago
  The two hang together. You campaign in your state to legalize something. Some other state, where you have very little influence, goes the other way. It isn't just cannabis. what if the law categorizes abortion as felony/murder? what if the law categorized certain types of sexual behavior as felony?
  - dillondoyle 2mo ago
    Already happening. They're pissed abortion is up. These alt-right/christian nationalists are trying to force their <s>'morals'</s> on the rest of us "She Got an Abortion. So A Texas Cop Used 83,000 Cameras to Track Her Down" https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/05/she-got-abortion-so-texas-cop-used-83000-cameras-track-her-down https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/05/she-got-abortion-so-te... it gets worse federally. "Blanche assures anti-abortion supporters that Dobbs will be ‘permanent in every single state’" https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/03/blanche-pledged-abortion-pill-crackdown-private-call-01023304 https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/03/blanche-pledged-abo... So what happens when they use cameras outside of usps to crate pretext so a crazy alt right state judge issues a warrant under the assumption that you picked up pills in the mail? "AG nominee tells faith leaders he will take action to restrict abortion drug access" https://stateline.org/2026/08/04/ag-nominee-tells-faith-leaders-he-will-take-action-to-restrict-abortion-drug-access/ https://stateline.org/2026/08/04/ag-nominee-tells-faith-lead... And relevant to interstate weed, what about kava, peptides, 7oh? they literally have million+ plus stakes in pushing drugs. Even when it means blocking worse drugs (7oh) so they can push slightly less addictive but still harmful garbage. "Senate inquiry suggests Trump administration softened kratom and tobacco policies in quid pro quo" https://www.statnews.com/2026/08/05/senator-ron-wyden-investigation-kennedy-flavored-vapes-kratom/ https://www.statnews.com/2026/08/05/senator-ron-wyden-invest... "Trump Administration’s Fake Crackdown Leaves Most ‘Gas Station Heroin’ on the Shelves. According to March 2026 financial disclosures, Mullin invested between $500,001 and $1 million in Botanic Tonics, LLC, of Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, the company that makes Feel Free Classic – the tonic found in the victim’s bedroom. Mullin reportedly urged officials to remove language from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) website warning of kratom’s harms." https://www.citizen.org/news/trump-administrations-fake-crackdown-leaves-most-gas-station-heroin-on-the-shelves/ https://www.citizen.org/news/trump-administrations-fake-crac... It's all disgusting. Their voters deserve these consequences. But they're forcing the rest of us to suffer.
thangalin 2mo ago
https://i.ibb.co/WWWYznHX/flock-future.png https://i.ibb.co/WWWYznHX/flock-future.png ;-) See also: * https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2019/06/06/web-of-knowledge/ https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2019/06/06/web-of-knowledge/ * https://medium.com/@speechgeek/scaling-joy-part-2-the-tech-trauma-origin-story-492772b41300 https://medium.com/@speechgeek/scaling-joy-part-2-the-tech-t...
ck2 2mo ago
is anyone else old enough to remember when cops first got tasers suddenly EVERYONE was getting tased it's like that give them a new "toy" to combat violent crime and instead it's used on everything else because zero repercussions I am starting to see Flock on the side of the road at every major shopping center unfortunately like "kavanaugh stops" I suspect the supreme court is going to put their permission into concrete regardless how they are abused * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kavanaugh_stop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kavanaugh_stop
- saghm 2mo ago
  "Don't flock camera me bro"
- Cider9986 2mo ago
  >give them a new "toy" Indeed. Like, no shit strapping a camera and microphone and sending it to an all knowing AI to analyze it all is going to reduce crime. But it's a violation of our human rights. It's clear these people do not understand the importance of privacy or rights. Crime is already decreasing. The bigger improvements would come from improving society, not restricting people's rights for more "safety". https://www.reddit.com/r/AskLE/comments/1srugkv https://www.reddit.com/r/AskLE/comments/1srugkv
- hereme888 2mo ago
  Um, what? Have you seen any cop tasing videos? I've never seen it abused in every video I've seen (hundreds).
  - whatisthiseven 2mo ago
    I know you are being sarcastic, but for others: I saw one literally yesterday of a game and wildlife officer tasing a man pumping gas. The gas spilled and then caught on fire. The tased man partially caught on fire and fell to the ground getting bruises. The officer continued yelling at him to comply, all the while the man was ablaze, shocked, and bruised. Cops should have tasers taken away. They believe they are "make people do what I say" devices rather than the rare "make this extremely violent person who is an imminent threat to life and person stop being violent temporarily so other officers can continue to use non-lethal force to de-escalate the situation".
Cider9986 2mo ago
I've seen it suggested to add a warrant requirement for police to use ALPRs. A warrant requirement is not a reasonable bandaid to consider allowing mass spying. There should be no mass spying by default. A warrant requirement makes sense for something like the locations of customers on cellular networks, because it's built into the tech. When you make the optional choice to create mass spying, safeguards do not make it acceptable.
- empyrrhicist 2mo ago
  Fun fact, they'd already need one if they weren't buying the data from private companies. This is because both the courts and legislature have been busy desecrating and burying the fourth amendment for decades.
sail2boat3 2mo ago
Not from the US, but I really wish folks from the US started thinking of creative ways to "produce probable cause" (if that makes any sense), get stopped without any harm, assemble enough individual cases into some kind of catalogue, and then be able to show people just how much the whole thing is bad with evidence that did not result in them actually getting what they were looking for. If I asked a random person about this, they'd probably just say - "but they found weed, right?"
- skeeter2020 2mo ago
  >> "produce probable cause" (if that makes any sense), get stopped without any harm, ... This is a very dangerous game, especially if you're not white.
  - sail2boat3 2mo ago
    100% agreed, easy for me to talk about it from a distance... just giving out the idea as it could be something to build upon later. I'm afraid that the way things currently stand, vast majority of people are only gonna see the cases where "it made sense to have that" for years and years, until they feel it one day on their own skin - and then their own story is not going to be heard, just like everyone else's before them. Frog boiling sometimes intentionally takes a lot of time
dataflow 2mo ago
I'm so confused, how is this creating a pretext? A pretext is a false reason. Like if they searched for one reason but they really did it for a different one. But that's not what I'm reading here? It seems they suspected something, they used that exact reason to perform a search, and that's exactly what they found. Terrible reason, okay, but why are they being accused of lying? If a thief threatens you saying you look like you have money, and it turns out you did, and he takes it, is that a pretext too?
- rglover 2mo ago
  The pretext is that his travel to another state was assumed to be to buy weed. They appear to be relying on his existing warrant and criminal record to justify having used Flock data to not just locate him, but manufacture probable cause. Unless they have direct evidence (photo from Flock of him ripping bong hits in his car at a light) prior to the stop to attach probable cause to, it's a pre-crime judgment. IANAL (if you are, feel free to poke holes), but I wouldn't presume it unlikely he walks under the 4th amendment, even if it's through appeals.
  - dataflow 2mo ago
    > The pretext is that his travel to another state was assumed to be to buy weed. [...] > Unless they have direct evidence [...] it's a pre-crime judgment. But how does it being pre-crime judgment etc. imply it is a pretext too? Just look up the definition: - A pretext is "a false reason given to hide the real motivation behind an action." [1] - A pretextual stop is "pull(ing) people over for minor rule violations [...] as an excuse to conduct a search and go fishing for other crimes." [2] Notice it says "false", "hide", and "other crime"? And not merely "bad reason" to "serve as an excuse" to "search for any crime"? Here, they appear to have done exactly what they claimed they their intentions were, and as a result discovered exactly what they suspected. Is anyone disputing this? If this was a "pretext", then what the heck are we alleging were their "real" motivations and "other" crimes? How could they have possibly been more honest in their intentions? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretext https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretext [2] https://www.policingproject.org/pretextual-traffic https://www.policingproject.org/pretextual-traffic
hereme888 2mo ago
Fake news. Heck of a twist on what really happened. Wisconsin police used Flock travel history to locate an already wanted man and develop marijuana suspicion. An officer’s claimed marijuana odor led to a vehicle search.
ryandvm 2mo ago
Not long until we have the first abortion capital punishment case when one of these death cult states tracks a lady across state lines...
mannanj 2mo ago
Again, I get downvoted by the fear-police on hacker news for this: - Montana LLC ownership of vehicles. Don't own your vehicles ya'll, and at least those license plates won't be traced to you. - Speak to a lawyer for how to meet any lawful use-tax obligations. Don't use this to avoid paying legitimate sales tax. - Maybe the insurance company tied to you and your driving of this vehicle, has a partnership with the flock network. Someone argued they could give away your vin-tied identity, though I haven't seen proof this is happening. Plus, if the market shows a need for insurance companies to offer privacy protection, maybe that will emerge. I trust we can figure out a way to normalize privacy to stand up against crimes and abusive behavior by state officials, the bad police, and an elected class of corrupted leaders who do not care about everyones rights to protect their own safety over yours. I would love if more people would send a powerful message to their officials of how this unconstitutional violation and compromise of basic decency, dignity and safety for most people for the benefit of a few has consequences.
- superultra 2mo ago
  I’m sorry but your solution is “don’t own a car?”
  - mannanj 2mo ago
    I haven’t heard you share a solution. Are you being constructive and engaging with good faith?
Der_Einzige 2mo ago
Y'all want to shit on hippie liberal states like Oregon that keep the police in a tight leash and de-facto decriminalized everything, but we had a whole state appeals court decision on this exact issue that means this should would NOT happen here: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/or-court-of-appeals/2124712.html https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/or-court-of-appeals/212471... As usual, homie was in the wrong state.
jimt1234 2mo ago
IANAL but the probable cause here (traveling across state lines) seems really weak. There's a million legitimate/legal reasons for someone to travel across state lines. That's the issue that jumps out at me here.
rmnoflock 2mo ago
I'm using legal liability for stalking and illegal searches as a tactic to get my town to take these down. Has anyone tried this route? https://rmnoflock.com/2026/07/29/rolling-meadows-flock-cameras-used-in-holiday-hills-stalking-case/ https://rmnoflock.com/2026/07/29/rolling-meadows-flock-camer...
searealist 2mo ago
What this article wants you to believe: Police are actively using flock to identify people traveling over state borders to buy marijuana and search their cars. What actually happened: Police used flock to locate someone with an active warrant for their arrest related to domestic violence. They noticed a pattern of crossing state lines at certain times, and used that to nab him. It turns out it was to buy marijuana and his car reeked of it, so he was charged with that, too.
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
darod 2mo ago
is it legal for police to track your movements in a state they have no jurisdiction in?
- deleted 2mo ago
  [deleted]
altcognito 2mo ago
Guaranteed this is being used against journalists and their sources by the feds.
MeteorMarc 2mo ago
Mass surveillance based on social media is prohibited in The Netherlands and presumably other European countries. However, running specific profiles on police owned ANPR camera's could be declared a proportional breach of privacy and thus legal.
monster_truck 2mo ago
They used to do this with normal DOT cameras anyways. That doesn't make it okay. The neat part is when they use fake names and badge numbers to deny that the stop ever even happened in the first place. It's much harder to get away with that these days Experienced this about 15 years ago, was lucky to have my friend along for the ride, who was a photographer. The pictures of those cops are the only evidence we have that it even happened. They wrote a whole pile of tickets that didn't exist when I went to try and pay them. Another time I had a state trooper say I was doing 140 in a 130hp car. He claimed that because I was wearing cutoff sweatpant shorts that I was growing weed? These dudes are useless. Forget about all of this, though. If you want to be mad, check out the solve rate for hit and runs over the past 20 years. Damage only cases are something like 1 in 10. Fatalities 2 in 5. With all these fucking cameras. What percentage of those 9 in 10 or 3 in 5 are cops, do you think?
semiquaver 2mo ago
This seems like a reach. Guy had an outstanding warrant and they did not need any pretext to arrest him.
greyface- 2mo ago
I used to get really upset when I saw a car on the road with obscured or disfigured plates. The rise of Flock/ALPRs has done a great deal to morally rehabilitate this behavior.
bdavisx 2mo ago
Here's my thoughts on how Flock and related tech should be handled. Nothing gets stored unless there's a specific judicial warrant. They can take a pic of my license plate, I'm in public, ok. But unless they have a warrant naming my license plate specifically, then nothing gets stored. At all. No log of the plate, no photo of the car, driver, etc. NOTHING. And this needs to be easily auditable. Those are my thoughts, curious about holes in my idea.
gwbas1c 2mo ago
> “Every child in this video is home tonight because Flock gave officers the right information at the right second,” ... “That’s the mission. That’s the whole company. I wouldn't trade that for anything.” I think it's clear that, if these things (flock cameras) continue to be a part of modern society, they need significantly higher oversight. What's painful with statements like above is that it shows that we just don't have good enough leadership to set appropriate standards for when things like flock cameras are appropriate.
rwz 2mo ago
If you ignore the policy question of do cops even need access to the kind of capabilities Flock tech provides, this particular case becomes a pretty clear example of user error amplified by the capabilities of the tech and not the issue with the tech itself. The cops didn't realize that the license plate they were searching was a) incomplete and therefore fuzzily matched multiple unrelated vehicles, and b) wasn't even stolen to begin with. This is similar to running `rm -r *` in a wrong folder and then shifting blame on rm for deleting the stuff you didn't want deleted. Sure, there's maybe a conversation here about overall rm ergonomics and if the average user is even competent enough to be allowed to run it, but the it's first and foremost a user error.

331 points by cdrnsf 2mo ago

daun_gee 2mo ago

[dead]

ux266478 2mo ago
The farm bill he enacted in his first term was a pretty solid legalization middle ground. The fact he flipped around on it in his second term makes me think it's more accidental than anything.

rileymat2 2mo ago

I am misunderstanding the article, if "The searches came to light in a Wisconsin criminal complaint against Edward Abrams-Phillips, who was wanted for bail jumping on domestic violence charges." he was wanted, why do they need a pretext for the stop?

jordanb 2mo ago
> The bail jumping charge was dismissed; Abrams-Phillips was found guilty only of weed possession in the case, according to the court records. Apparently the bail jumping charge was weak? That seems like a black-and-white situation to me so no idea what the details were, but there was clearly something wrong with that charge. If the charge was so weak then they probably couldn't get a warrant to arrest him outright? Therefore they needed the marijuana probable cause to stop and search him. Regardless the disturbing part is that they're using surveillance state footage of a person traveling to a state where something is legal as "probable cause" for a crime.
- ang_cire 2mo ago
  The bail jumping charge was actually dropped in the end, so weed possession was the only charge.
- crooked-v 2mo ago
  Reading between the lines, I would bet the bail jumping charge was based on him crossing state lines back and forth, and was dismissed by the court when it became clear he wasn't actually running away anywhere. Thus the cops hunting for any and all petty bullshit to punish him with instead, like the marijuana possession.
  - jordanb 2mo ago
    That makes sense yes.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
tantalor 2mo ago
The article is wrong on this point: the fact that he was crossing state lines was not a pretext for the stop. They actually wanted to add another charge. The cameras helped them find the right opportunity to do that. If they just picked him up driving around, they would only be able to charge those existing crimes. By waiting for him to cross state lines, they have a chance to add on another charge. They already had enough PC for the stop, and they could have searched the car as incident to the arrest at any time.
- plorg 2mo ago
  Unless I'm misreading this is all covered explicitly in the article.
  - albedoa 2mo ago
    The article claims multiple times that the cops used the interstate travel as a pretext for the search that turned up the marijuana, but in most jurisdictions, the arrest would have allowed them to inventory the car anyway as part of the impound process. Unless this jurisdiction is an outlier, the pretext wasn't needed for the search. As the parent comment says, the cops used the interstate travel as a timing strategy to increase the charges.
deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]
garyfirestorm 2mo ago
IANAL - if they break the bail conditions the judge may issue a warrant depending on severity, clearly a warrant was not issued here, otherwise there’s no need for pretext like you said. Article also states bail jumping charge was dismissed but the weed charge is the only charge that remains.
- Muromec 2mo ago
  They still have to bother with actually going to a judge and actually getting that warrant. Why do that if you can just skip it and not deal with inconvenient questions.
  - saghm 2mo ago
    The Flock camera network is much less of a stickler for those pesky civil liberties being respected
hwillis 2mo ago
1. those charges were dismissed 2. the article address that specifically: > The case is an example of Flock cameras being used to arrest a wanted alleged criminal suspected of committing a violent crime. But it is also an example of police surveillance overreach *in that the cameras were specifically used to create a pretext to tack on additional petty crimes* based primarily on where a person’s vehicle had traveled.
- bko 2mo ago
  I think using technology to capture alleged criminals is a good thing.
  - nemomarx 2mo ago
    does this work for any allegation? if it was a serious one surely they could get a warrant. if it's not enough for that it might as well be gossip imo.
    - FireBeyond 2mo ago
      According to Flock's CEO, yes. He has stated he sees a false positive as a better outcome than a false negative.
      - bko 2mo ago
        Flock provides technology. They don't set the laws. It's like complaining about the CEO of Ford bc a police Ford vehicle damaged some property
        antonvs 2mo ago
        Flock provides tools and information that influence and encourage bad behavior from police. Yes, we need laws to help stop this. Ideally, those laws should entirely destroy Flock's business model and lead to its bankruptcy. The issue is not whether cameras are useful for law enforcement. The issue is how that camera information is managed and overseen. What Flock is doing would fit right in in a cartoon authoritarian state, but it doesn't belong in the real world.
fusslo 2mo ago
Ok, the article is confusing but the complaint is a little better. > The vehicle was registered to Edward 12-01-1993. Edward had an active Brown County felony warrant with nationwide extradition. so he wasn't just wanted but also had an active warrant. > Multiple Deputies checked the area but were unable to locate the vehicle at that time Police tried arresting him before, but couldn't find him. The police then used flock to find a pattern of coming/going over the state line. I'm guessing they stationed someone nearby to wait for a flock alert and arrest him. The following is total speculation on my part: The police are including the "Based on prior flock hits, the vehicle travels to Michigan frequently which is a known source State for Marijuana as it is legal there." to build probable cause for searching the car and finding the marijuana. Otherwise the only PC is: "He declined consent to search his vehicle. However, DeputyKowalski informed him he would be conducting a search of his vehicle due to the odor of marijuana". Maybe the olfactory skills of officers are so dubious that courts need more facts than just an odor? That'd be my guess. direct link to the complaint (it's also embedded in the article) https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/28537132/2025cf000671comp6522626-1.pdf https://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/28537132/2025cf000671...
- mixdup 2mo ago
  They don't need probable cause to search his vehicle if he had a warrant. They can search his car because they are arresting him and towing the vehicle
  - cogman10 2mo ago
    > They don't need probable cause to search his vehicle if he had a warrant. Incorrect. Warrants have to be specific. An arrest warrant is not a general search warrant (in fact, general search warrants aren't legal). You don't lose your rights because a cop is arresting you. Now, what can happen (and probably would happen) is the cops can take a drug sniffing dog to the car when it goes to impound and while the owner isn't there and claim "Oh, the dog signaled on the car so we searched it".
    - jimt1234 2mo ago

MSFT_Edging 2mo ago

This is the big problem with mass surveillance as a whole. With enough time, they'll find some pretext to bring you in, even if the original crime they want you for is weak. This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down. Lives will be completely derailed, police and judges will not be held accountable. The wrongful arrestees will still be in debt to the local jail and court for various fees they racked up. Trust in the justice system will continue to degrade and more and more violence will be used against people to maintain order. We hold police to high standards for search/arrest because they have the monopoly on violence. Even if they're wrong, you can't shoot back. Even if they're slamming your loved ones into the pavement, breaking their teeth, you cannot kick the cop in the head or else they have permission to murder you both. Mass surveillance is a loophole to this contract.

cucumber3732842 2mo ago
>This will ruin lives, even if they're eventually let go. Jobs lost, evicted from homes, cars towed, pets surrendered and put down. Yes. That's exactly the point. Comply with every little thing, no matter how absurd, or else your life will unravel. Look through a historical comment (especially from back when "big data" was the buzzword) thread on any subject where HN is pro regulation and pro government. This is EXACTLY what the useful idiots want. They want some NYC liquor store owner to pay a hundred grand to the state because that one time he visited NH he loaded up his van with tax free henny to sell back home. They want that exurban undeveloped lot owner to lose their house for letting their buddy with a tree service dump there and fill in a few hundred square feet over the course of half a decade. They want some random industrial employer that makes nuts and bolts or something to be fined millions of dollars because their maintenance employees spray painted a piece of equipment in the parking lot without the PPE and pollution compliance measures befitting a commercial paint operation. They want the jackboot on the throat of everyone who steps out of line on any axis that they care about. They see the way the banking industry tries to stay away from weed, porn and guns because the upside isn't worth the risk of being combed over by the enforcers. And instead of seeing it as cautionary, they see it as a model that needs to be scaled down to the small businesses and the lowly individual peasants. Of course they don't lay it out so plainly. They use words like "negative externality" and "antisocial" and "dis-incentivize" to whitewash it but that doesn't change what it is.

CharlesW 2mo ago

Also see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-crime https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-crime

Cider9986 2mo ago

Also Flock, in the past week: All of Winona Police Department's Flock cameras cut down and stolen https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49171656 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49171656 241 comments How Cops Are Trying to Hide Their Use of Flock https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49172076 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49172076 9 comments Flock's CEO Faced Me After Its Cameras Led to My Wrongful Stop https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49156650 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49156650 118 comments Flock – Chilling Effects: Long Island's Emerging Open-Air Prison https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49148541 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49148541 38 comments Leaked Flock Guide Shows How It Teaches Cops to Promote Its Tech https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158837 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49158837 17 comments

Windchaser 2mo ago
Man outlines how hardened criminals take down Flock cameras, detailing it step-by-step: https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1v78ihu/how_criminals_take_down_flock_cameras/ https://www.reddit.com/r/interestingasfuck/comments/1v78ihu/...
- willy_k 2mo ago
  Hopefully none of those hardened criminals know that a circular saw is the fastest way by far to cut through posts!
  - btbuildem 2mo ago
    Kickback would be bad if it binds in the kerf - I think sawzall is better/safer for cutting pipe that's under load.
- LocalH 2mo ago
  You spelled "heroes" incorrectly.
  - NekkoDroid 2mo ago

Ccecil 2mo ago

Based on my observations (news reports, local chatter, etc) it seems that every state that borders a state with legal Cannabis does this. Idaho does this very frequently (since just about every border is a legal source). They take advantages of the bottlenecks on highways and have cameras and/or officers there. If it is Flock, interagency communications, license plate readers or just "enhanced stops" for things like a crack in the windshield. People seem to forget that while buying in one state is legal it actually can become a much larger crime than just possession as soon as you cross state lines. It "can" become a federal matter... This person in the article attracted the gaze of Sauron.

WarmWash 2mo ago
They did this in my state, and now that other state has been legal for over a year and a half, but the cameras are all still there
- Ccecil 2mo ago
  North Idaho started adding license plate readers and cameras back in the early 2k's using funding given out after 9/11. Locally there was a recent pushback on them and the sheriff basically said "They've been there forever" and "Don't worry...it's just us with the footage"
asdff 2mo ago
They are making an assumption that someone is buying when they go into the dispensary. Not necessarily the case. They aren't compelled to buy anything when entering.
- gwbas1c 2mo ago
  Which if you know that's the case, it's a good way to f*ck with the police. Travel to the dispensary and be empty handed when the search comes. After 2-3 searches you file a cease-and-desist.

TZubiri 2mo ago

I don't quite get the thesis of the author here. Regardless of the view that one may have on Cannabis laws, they are illegal, if the system is correctly detaining people that break those laws, and you have a problem with that, is the problem with the enforcement system or the law? If you don't like some aspect of this, should you be campaigning for removal of flock cameras? Or campaigning for cannabis rights and Controlled Substances reform?

site-packages1 2mo ago
The issue isn't prosecution for illegality, among other things it's the anti-Fourth-Amendment methods for constructing the case. So, I'm going to campaign for government entities to follow the Constitution (as amended).
- TZubiri 2mo ago
  Which of the events would be in violation of the 4th amendment here?
  - rglover 2mo ago
    A reply to another comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49189750 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49189750
forlorn_mammoth 2mo ago
The two hang together. You campaign in your state to legalize something. Some other state, where you have very little influence, goes the other way. It isn't just cannabis. what if the law categorizes abortion as felony/murder? what if the law categorized certain types of sexual behavior as felony?
- dillondoyle 2mo ago
  Already happening. They're pissed abortion is up. These alt-right/christian nationalists are trying to force their <s>'morals'</s> on the rest of us "She Got an Abortion. So A Texas Cop Used 83,000 Cameras to Track Her Down" https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/05/she-got-abortion-so-texas-cop-used-83000-cameras-track-her-down https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/05/she-got-abortion-so-te... it gets worse federally. "Blanche assures anti-abortion supporters that Dobbs will be ‘permanent in every single state’" https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/03/blanche-pledged-abortion-pill-crackdown-private-call-01023304 https://www.politico.com/news/2026/08/03/blanche-pledged-abo... So what happens when they use cameras outside of usps to crate pretext so a crazy alt right state judge issues a warrant under the assumption that you picked up pills in the mail? "AG nominee tells faith leaders he will take action to restrict abortion drug access" https://stateline.org/2026/08/04/ag-nominee-tells-faith-leaders-he-will-take-action-to-restrict-abortion-drug-access/ https://stateline.org/2026/08/04/ag-nominee-tells-faith-lead... And relevant to interstate weed, what about kava, peptides, 7oh? they literally have million+ plus stakes in pushing drugs. Even when it means blocking worse drugs (7oh) so they can push slightly less addictive but still harmful garbage. "Senate inquiry suggests Trump administration softened kratom and tobacco policies in quid pro quo" https://www.statnews.com/2026/08/05/senator-ron-wyden-investigation-kennedy-flavored-vapes-kratom/ https://www.statnews.com/2026/08/05/senator-ron-wyden-invest... "Trump Administration’s Fake Crackdown Leaves Most ‘Gas Station Heroin’ on the Shelves. According to March 2026 financial disclosures, Mullin invested between $500,001 and $1 million in Botanic Tonics, LLC, of Broken Arrow, Oklahoma, the company that makes Feel Free Classic – the tonic found in the victim’s bedroom. Mullin reportedly urged officials to remove language from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) website warning of kratom’s harms." https://www.citizen.org/news/trump-administrations-fake-crackdown-leaves-most-gas-station-heroin-on-the-shelves/ https://www.citizen.org/news/trump-administrations-fake-crac... It's all disgusting. Their voters deserve these consequences. But they're forcing the rest of us to suffer.

thangalin 2mo ago

https://i.ibb.co/WWWYznHX/flock-future.png https://i.ibb.co/WWWYznHX/flock-future.png ;-) See also: * https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2019/06/06/web-of-knowledge/ https://dave.autonoma.ca/blog/2019/06/06/web-of-knowledge/ * https://medium.com/@speechgeek/scaling-joy-part-2-the-tech-trauma-origin-story-492772b41300 https://medium.com/@speechgeek/scaling-joy-part-2-the-tech-t...

ck2 2mo ago

is anyone else old enough to remember when cops first got tasers suddenly EVERYONE was getting tased it's like that give them a new "toy" to combat violent crime and instead it's used on everything else because zero repercussions I am starting to see Flock on the side of the road at every major shopping center unfortunately like "kavanaugh stops" I suspect the supreme court is going to put their permission into concrete regardless how they are abused * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kavanaugh_stop https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kavanaugh_stop

saghm 2mo ago
"Don't flock camera me bro"
Cider9986 2mo ago
>give them a new "toy" Indeed. Like, no shit strapping a camera and microphone and sending it to an all knowing AI to analyze it all is going to reduce crime. But it's a violation of our human rights. It's clear these people do not understand the importance of privacy or rights. Crime is already decreasing. The bigger improvements would come from improving society, not restricting people's rights for more "safety". https://www.reddit.com/r/AskLE/comments/1srugkv https://www.reddit.com/r/AskLE/comments/1srugkv
hereme888 2mo ago
Um, what? Have you seen any cop tasing videos? I've never seen it abused in every video I've seen (hundreds).
- whatisthiseven 2mo ago
  I know you are being sarcastic, but for others: I saw one literally yesterday of a game and wildlife officer tasing a man pumping gas. The gas spilled and then caught on fire. The tased man partially caught on fire and fell to the ground getting bruises. The officer continued yelling at him to comply, all the while the man was ablaze, shocked, and bruised. Cops should have tasers taken away. They believe they are "make people do what I say" devices rather than the rare "make this extremely violent person who is an imminent threat to life and person stop being violent temporarily so other officers can continue to use non-lethal force to de-escalate the situation".

Cider9986 2mo ago

I've seen it suggested to add a warrant requirement for police to use ALPRs. A warrant requirement is not a reasonable bandaid to consider allowing mass spying. There should be no mass spying by default. A warrant requirement makes sense for something like the locations of customers on cellular networks, because it's built into the tech. When you make the optional choice to create mass spying, safeguards do not make it acceptable.

empyrrhicist 2mo ago
Fun fact, they'd already need one if they weren't buying the data from private companies. This is because both the courts and legislature have been busy desecrating and burying the fourth amendment for decades.

sail2boat3 2mo ago

Not from the US, but I really wish folks from the US started thinking of creative ways to "produce probable cause" (if that makes any sense), get stopped without any harm, assemble enough individual cases into some kind of catalogue, and then be able to show people just how much the whole thing is bad with evidence that did not result in them actually getting what they were looking for. If I asked a random person about this, they'd probably just say - "but they found weed, right?"

skeeter2020 2mo ago
>> "produce probable cause" (if that makes any sense), get stopped without any harm, ... This is a very dangerous game, especially if you're not white.
- sail2boat3 2mo ago
  100% agreed, easy for me to talk about it from a distance... just giving out the idea as it could be something to build upon later. I'm afraid that the way things currently stand, vast majority of people are only gonna see the cases where "it made sense to have that" for years and years, until they feel it one day on their own skin - and then their own story is not going to be heard, just like everyone else's before them. Frog boiling sometimes intentionally takes a lot of time

dataflow 2mo ago

I'm so confused, how is this creating a pretext? A pretext is a false reason. Like if they searched for one reason but they really did it for a different one. But that's not what I'm reading here? It seems they suspected something, they used that exact reason to perform a search, and that's exactly what they found. Terrible reason, okay, but why are they being accused of lying? If a thief threatens you saying you look like you have money, and it turns out you did, and he takes it, is that a pretext too?

rglover 2mo ago
The pretext is that his travel to another state was assumed to be to buy weed. They appear to be relying on his existing warrant and criminal record to justify having used Flock data to not just locate him, but manufacture probable cause. Unless they have direct evidence (photo from Flock of him ripping bong hits in his car at a light) prior to the stop to attach probable cause to, it's a pre-crime judgment. IANAL (if you are, feel free to poke holes), but I wouldn't presume it unlikely he walks under the 4th amendment, even if it's through appeals.
- dataflow 2mo ago
  > The pretext is that his travel to another state was assumed to be to buy weed. [...] > Unless they have direct evidence [...] it's a pre-crime judgment. But how does it being pre-crime judgment etc. imply it is a pretext too? Just look up the definition: - A pretext is "a false reason given to hide the real motivation behind an action." [1] - A pretextual stop is "pull(ing) people over for minor rule violations [...] as an excuse to conduct a search and go fishing for other crimes." [2] Notice it says "false", "hide", and "other crime"? And not merely "bad reason" to "serve as an excuse" to "search for any crime"? Here, they appear to have done exactly what they claimed they their intentions were, and as a result discovered exactly what they suspected. Is anyone disputing this? If this was a "pretext", then what the heck are we alleging were their "real" motivations and "other" crimes? How could they have possibly been more honest in their intentions? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretext https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretext [2] https://www.policingproject.org/pretextual-traffic https://www.policingproject.org/pretextual-traffic

hereme888 2mo ago

Fake news. Heck of a twist on what really happened. Wisconsin police used Flock travel history to locate an already wanted man and develop marijuana suspicion. An officer’s claimed marijuana odor led to a vehicle search.

ryandvm 2mo ago

Not long until we have the first abortion capital punishment case when one of these death cult states tracks a lady across state lines...

mannanj 2mo ago

Again, I get downvoted by the fear-police on hacker news for this: - Montana LLC ownership of vehicles. Don't own your vehicles ya'll, and at least those license plates won't be traced to you. - Speak to a lawyer for how to meet any lawful use-tax obligations. Don't use this to avoid paying legitimate sales tax. - Maybe the insurance company tied to you and your driving of this vehicle, has a partnership with the flock network. Someone argued they could give away your vin-tied identity, though I haven't seen proof this is happening. Plus, if the market shows a need for insurance companies to offer privacy protection, maybe that will emerge. I trust we can figure out a way to normalize privacy to stand up against crimes and abusive behavior by state officials, the bad police, and an elected class of corrupted leaders who do not care about everyones rights to protect their own safety over yours. I would love if more people would send a powerful message to their officials of how this unconstitutional violation and compromise of basic decency, dignity and safety for most people for the benefit of a few has consequences.

superultra 2mo ago
I’m sorry but your solution is “don’t own a car?”
- mannanj 2mo ago
  I haven’t heard you share a solution. Are you being constructive and engaging with good faith?

Der_Einzige 2mo ago

Y'all want to shit on hippie liberal states like Oregon that keep the police in a tight leash and de-facto decriminalized everything, but we had a whole state appeals court decision on this exact issue that means this should would NOT happen here: https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/or-court-of-appeals/2124712.html https://caselaw.findlaw.com/court/or-court-of-appeals/212471... As usual, homie was in the wrong state.

jimt1234 2mo ago

IANAL but the probable cause here (traveling across state lines) seems really weak. There's a million legitimate/legal reasons for someone to travel across state lines. That's the issue that jumps out at me here.

rmnoflock 2mo ago

I'm using legal liability for stalking and illegal searches as a tactic to get my town to take these down. Has anyone tried this route? https://rmnoflock.com/2026/07/29/rolling-meadows-flock-cameras-used-in-holiday-hills-stalking-case/ https://rmnoflock.com/2026/07/29/rolling-meadows-flock-camer...

searealist 2mo ago

What this article wants you to believe: Police are actively using flock to identify people traveling over state borders to buy marijuana and search their cars. What actually happened: Police used flock to locate someone with an active warrant for their arrest related to domestic violence. They noticed a pattern of crossing state lines at certain times, and used that to nab him. It turns out it was to buy marijuana and his car reeked of it, so he was charged with that, too.

deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]

darod 2mo ago

is it legal for police to track your movements in a state they have no jurisdiction in?

deleted 2mo ago
[deleted]

altcognito 2mo ago

Guaranteed this is being used against journalists and their sources by the feds.

MeteorMarc 2mo ago

Mass surveillance based on social media is prohibited in The Netherlands and presumably other European countries. However, running specific profiles on police owned ANPR camera's could be declared a proportional breach of privacy and thus legal.

monster_truck 2mo ago

They used to do this with normal DOT cameras anyways. That doesn't make it okay. The neat part is when they use fake names and badge numbers to deny that the stop ever even happened in the first place. It's much harder to get away with that these days Experienced this about 15 years ago, was lucky to have my friend along for the ride, who was a photographer. The pictures of those cops are the only evidence we have that it even happened. They wrote a whole pile of tickets that didn't exist when I went to try and pay them. Another time I had a state trooper say I was doing 140 in a 130hp car. He claimed that because I was wearing cutoff sweatpant shorts that I was growing weed? These dudes are useless. Forget about all of this, though. If you want to be mad, check out the solve rate for hit and runs over the past 20 years. Damage only cases are something like 1 in 10. Fatalities 2 in 5. With all these fucking cameras. What percentage of those 9 in 10 or 3 in 5 are cops, do you think?

semiquaver 2mo ago

This seems like a reach. Guy had an outstanding warrant and they did not need any pretext to arrest him.

greyface- 2mo ago

I used to get really upset when I saw a car on the road with obscured or disfigured plates. The rise of Flock/ALPRs has done a great deal to morally rehabilitate this behavior.

bdavisx 2mo ago

Here's my thoughts on how Flock and related tech should be handled. Nothing gets stored unless there's a specific judicial warrant. They can take a pic of my license plate, I'm in public, ok. But unless they have a warrant naming my license plate specifically, then nothing gets stored. At all. No log of the plate, no photo of the car, driver, etc. NOTHING. And this needs to be easily auditable. Those are my thoughts, curious about holes in my idea.

gwbas1c 2mo ago

> “Every child in this video is home tonight because Flock gave officers the right information at the right second,” ... “That’s the mission. That’s the whole company. I wouldn't trade that for anything.” I think it's clear that, if these things (flock cameras) continue to be a part of modern society, they need significantly higher oversight. What's painful with statements like above is that it shows that we just don't have good enough leadership to set appropriate standards for when things like flock cameras are appropriate.

rwz 2mo ago

If you ignore the policy question of do cops even need access to the kind of capabilities Flock tech provides, this particular case becomes a pretty clear example of user error amplified by the capabilities of the tech and not the issue with the tech itself. The cops didn't realize that the license plate they were searching was a) incomplete and therefore fuzzily matched multiple unrelated vehicles, and b) wasn't even stolen to begin with. This is similar to running `rm -r *` in a wrong folder and then shifting blame on rm for deleting the stuff you didn't want deleted. Sure, there's maybe a conversation here about overall rm ergonomics and if the average user is even competent enough to be allowed to run it, but the it's first and foremost a user error.