4 ms·
Your comment can be summarized as "there is no explosion of 'bad' things occurring, but we should have more surveillance anyways." How does that conclusion foll
by text0404 2mo ago
Your comment can be summarized as "there is no explosion of 'bad' things occurring, but we should have more surveillance anyways." How does that conclusion follow from your premise? If crime rates have remained steady and there's been no increase in "bad things" are happening, why do we need a surveillance state?
- JuniperMesos 2mo agoBeing the victim of theft or vandalism is bad even if the act of theft/vandalism doesn't get reported in official crime statistics, which can happen for a variety of reasons. There's no reason to assume that the amount of crime tolerated by society and (partially) reflected in official crime statistics is ideal for society at large.
- yipinwong 2mo agoExplained simpler, there are crimes everywhere. Some tracked, some not. Untracked ones are the ones we track via Flock cams. There is only so much man-power that police or the govt can do.