3 ms·
I don't believe a legal solution is possible. We need a three-tiered response to Flock's surveillance state business strategy, depending on what level of meddli
by quacked 2mo ago
I don't believe a legal solution is possible. We need a three-tiered response to Flock's surveillance state business strategy, depending on what level of meddling each citizen is comfortable with.
1. Protest via yard signs and awareness (what you're doing)
2. Impermanent vandalism. I like the idea of hanging copies of the fourth amendment over the lenses
3. Permanent vandalism. I think we need bounties on camera destruction and public legal funds to assist in defense, bail, etc.
The police as a class/caste are not interested in the fundamental principles that America was founded on. Individual officers may be interested in civil freedom and privacy but as an entity they only ever march in the direction of total surveillance and domination of the citizenry.
- edot 2mo agoAbsolutely not. Horrible advice. You give the rest of us peaceful majority a bad name. Protest legally. Your post glows.
- crooked-v 2mo agoGenuinely effective protests are rarely entirely legal.
- onoesworkacct 2mo agoWho's more effective at protesting, USA or France? And, which country routinely sets a bunch of shit on fire when they need to? That's right.
- edoceo 2mo agoAmerica started with an illegal protest.
- assimpleaspossi 2mo agoYou'll never gain traction with your post on social internet forums like this despite the reality and truth of it. You'll be downvoted to quiet and eliminate your opinion.
- quacked 2mo agoIn what possible way would the broader public destroying Flock cameras on sight and allying with one another to defend those caught doing it benefit intelligence agencies?