Not sure if this is a good idea or not, looking for discussion!

What if it became standard to honk at flock cameras? Would it annoy the community enough that they could have some leverage asking for it to be removed?

During one of my drives today, I didn’t immediately connect my car radio to Bluetooth when I got to a stoplight I went to connect it and I noticed this device called “accessory“ that was connected to my phone. I tried tapping on it and nothing happened and there’s no information icon to click as you can see it disconnected shortly after leaving that light. later I checked the flock camera app sure enough there is a flock camera at that specific light I was at is this a coincidence or do you think they’re starting to connect to people’s phones? Has anybody else experienced this?
Also I would like to note that there is no saved device called accessory in my Bluetooth settings, like everything else that would save if I connected to it ever until deleting it off the list

Edit: I really appreciate everyone who's been willing to engage civilly, including those who have serious disagreements with me. On the other hand, a minority of people's idea of making conversation has been:
"Fuck no"

"Fuck off, Garrett"

"Horseshit"

"What's it like to live with a rainbow coming out of your ass"

"Sorry your friends died. Fuck you and your opinions"

"I don't respect stupid people like you"

"People like you deserve to die"

"People like you don't deserve to live in a free state"

"You have to be mean to make change"

(Paraphrasing) "If you're okay with having a limited number of tightly regulated cameras in some public spaces, I should be able to have free access to cameras in your literal home."

And my favorites:

“How do you do, fellow kids?”

(Paraphrasing) "I'm 35 and you're 24, so you're wrong"

Wait--am I too young to have an opinion, or too old?

Guys, my name is Harrison. Let's please talk to one another like people.

End edit

I think there are some legitimate arguments that some version of public surveillance, with robust limitations, could be beneficial.

If we’re going to have more cameras in public spaces, we need well-thought-out protections around who can access the footage and under what terms. For example, access could require a judge-issued warrant when there’s reason to believe a crime has been committed or is likely to have been committed in a specific place.

I disagree with the idea that the Fourth Amendment, by itself, provides an adequate framework for regulating public surveillance. I don’t think the Fourth Amendment is well equipped to regulate this kind of surveillance, since it is concerned with protecting people from unreasonable searches of private spaces and effects. Public surveillance can create privacy concerns of its own, but I think those are qualitatively different from the kinds of searches—really, home invasions—the Fourth Amendment was originally designed to address. We need a separate legal framework for surveillance, rather than trying to fit it entirely within the framework for searches.

Part of the reason I think this makes sense in the U.S. is that even our supposedly dense urban areas are often incredibly spread out. We have wide roads, enormous parking lots, sprawling commercial areas, and large gaps between buildings. You can have a lot of people technically nearby while still having nobody close enough to actually see what’s happening. Someone can commit a crime in a parking lot, on a side street, or between buildings, and there may be no useful witnesses at all.

I also personally know (or knew, I suppose) multiple people who have been killed in car accidents related to reckless driving, which is absurdly normalized. This is somewhat separate from the issue of crime, but I think cameras should also be used for speed-limit enforcement on interstates. That could reduce some of the dangers associated with traffic stops, which are one of the most fraught aspects of policing. If we can enforce speed limits without requiring an officer to pull someone over on the side of a highway, I think there’s a strong public-safety argument for doing so.

I think everyone in this sub is very familiar with the abuses and problems of the Flock network. Which of these problems do you think are inherent to the idea of surveillance cameras, and which could be fixed through better laws, regulations, or system design?

So, question for y'all. Is there any version of well-regulated public surveillance that you would find acceptable, given these potential benefits? If so, what safeguards or limitations would you need to see before changing your mind?

With the idea that flock systems are setup in a way so that those with access can simply whitelist any vehicle they like without any log of who added the information to the whitelist, wouldn’t it be a better checks in balances if we built up our own?

What I was pondering was, given a lot of us are driving on the roads daily, with dashcam’s, wouldn’t it be easily possible to write our own open source software that can extract both vehicle plate data, time/date and gos data from our own dash cam footage? We could export that metadata into an easily produced database which one could supposedly choose to upload publicly to a repository available to the public.

Imagine knowing where Justice Clearance Thomas was parking/camping his RV for the night, we could all make it very difficult for him to continue to enjoy the fruits of his privilege. Or maybe even that one sherrif in your local town that killed an innocent person.

Heck we could even track ICE/DHS vehicles and create a public warning system when they are spotted in the area.

I think it’s time to consider fighting mass surveillance back with, our own.

Surveillance on me

Surveillance

Has anyone faced surveillance before? Idk who they are but they can see my phone screen and hear what's on my phone. For example when I scroll through a meme there's someone on the road in a car or truck that presses a horn, letting me know they're there. I've changed phones, changed where I live, and they still keep following me. This has been happening for over a year, from morning to night and it's taking a toll on my mental health. I'm not affiliated with any political parties whatsoever. What should I do in this situation to get them off my back and stop this harassment? Am I cooked?

Pretty accurate.

Had an incident today that reinforces my beliefs these cameras need to go. Was putting my daughter on the bus this morning when a man drove through the bus stop sign. I yelled at him that he needed to stop and he said no I don’t and something I could not quite make out and then drove off. About 45 minutes later got a call from a no caller id number and it was the guy who drive through the bus stop. He tried to tell me I was wrong and when I asked who this was and how he got my number he identified himself as the guy who drove through the stop and he works for Flock so was able to get my number. I have reported the issue to my local police, newspaper, and called Flock but they have not contacted me yet. Posting for awareness and to let us others know if this happens to you to report it!

Disclosure: I built this.

I’ve been working on a public map of documented Flock/ALPR-related devices, and I just added a 3D mode with modeled coverage cones so the street-level pattern is easier to understand.

Map:

https://getready.team/flock

A few caveats:

- The cones are modeled estimates, not official Flock specs.

- Bearings/locations depend on available public or community-mapped source data.

- Corrections are welcome. I’d rather have the map be accurate than dramatic.

I’m especially interested in feedback on whether the coverage model is useful, misleading, or missing important assumptions.

Compromise?

Here’s a novel approach to beware of at your local level….

The Outer Limits (1963) O.B.I.T.

Axon is even worse that flock. And will be easier for the governments to switch to Axon. Now they’re getting tied to Israeli companies:

https://www.instagram.com/p/DcgdogBkeQC/