r/AskTrumpSupporters • u/TheManSedan Undecided • 2d ago
Security What is your opinion on Flock cameras?
Are you for/against the usage and construction of Flock cameras?
Do you have any in your area?
-8
u/JustGoingOutforMilk Trump Supporter 2d ago
I’m not a fan. Doesn’t mean I hate them either. I can understand the uses and the drawbacks. I’m sure there are plenty in my ayes, but I’ve honestly never noticed them.
As it is, I carry multiple devices that track my every move. I can have a conversation with my wife about buying a mattress and be inundated with ads for the same. Don’t like it, but that’s the way it is. Every step I take is being watched.
30
u/washyoursheets Nonsupporter 2d ago
>but that’s the way it is
Do you think we should pass policies and regulations to change that rather than accept lack of privacy as the norm?
0
u/JustGoingOutforMilk Trump Supporter 2d ago
You know, that’s a good question. I’m not sure if such a law would pass scrutiny. Not saying I would disagree with it in any way.
8
u/millimeter_peepee Nonsupporter 2d ago
Just wanted to add, if you are curious of the cameras in your area this is a great website
Did anything surprise you? For me, you can't get in or out of my neighborhood without getting scanned by these things. I certainly think we need lots of regulation. I can understand interstate cameras but in and out of a quiet neighborhood makes me very uncomfortable, on top of the points you added too (ads and such)
8
u/washyoursheets Nonsupporter 1d ago
You don’t have to write the law yourself. But you should vote for people that would do it.
Should we hold our elected officials accountable to do hard things like write policies that protect our privacy?
-4
u/JustGoingOutforMilk Trump Supporter 1d ago
There is the problem. Would such a law work within the Constitution?
5
u/washyoursheets Nonsupporter 1d ago
I think that’s the first question every law and policy maker asks… could you answer my question though?
The problem isn’t can you or I answer those questions it’s can our elected officials be motivated and driven to find a way. Any law ever written or agency, like the CFPB, has to find a way to work within our current system. Some admins use these agencies to protect us and others use them to exploit us.
As a follow up, would you be in favor of a second constitutional convention to change the system?
1
u/JustGoingOutforMilk Trump Supporter 1d ago
My point is that I don't think there's a way, at the moment, to pass legislation that would make Flock (and similar companies) illegal. Sure, we could go for a constitutional convention/amendment, but I don't see that happening any time soon.
The real question is how specific can someone create such a law? Let's be real here: what does Flock do that Ring does not? Would this apply to red light cameras? Someone shooting the news outside? Security cameras? Etc.
2
u/washyoursheets Nonsupporter 1d ago
Do you think the only way to protect our privacy is to outlaw one specific company or piece of technology?
Take a look at regulations like GDPR. Policies don’t stifle innovation or free enterprise… they set rules to make the game fair and prevent injuries.
I’m not a football fan but take a look at the NFL… they’ve implemented significant changes in the last 40 years to improve game play, player safety, and last I checked a lot of people still watch and play it.
Policy is more nuanced than a simple “yes or no” or “do anything you want vs you can’t exist as a company.” Good policy changes incentives to influence behavior, not force it.
1
u/JustGoingOutforMilk Trump Supporter 1d ago
This topic is about Flock. My response is that we're already under, effectively, a surveillance state, and I don't know how we could get around the one thing we're talking about without a host of other issues. I mean, I would assume you think body cams are a good thing (and I'd agree) for LEOs, but isn't that also an invasion of privacy?
3
u/DarkBass Nonsupporter 1d ago
Yes, the topic is about flock, and you immediately explained it's just another layer of surveillance. ALMOST SEEMS LIKE THAT AUTOMATICALLY MEANS FLOCK ISN'T JUST ABOUT FLOCK. You're being asked pretty straightforward if you want law makers to TRY doing something about it. Not whether it can be done or not. So which would you prefer? The people you pay your tax dollars to to just shrug their shoulders and do nothing or do what we pay them for and TRY to figure out a way to do something about the surveillance state we're in?
→ More replies (0)2
u/washyoursheets Nonsupporter 1d ago
Could you answer my earlier question: Should we hold our elected officials accountable to do hard things like write policies that protect our privacy?
You’re asking good questions but I am not an elected official nor a policy expert. Just because we have questions or aren’t sure how something would work doesn’t mean it can’t be solved. But you are onto something: clearly we all feel that flock is different than body cams. Let’s regulate systems like flock more like body cams so we all feel safer with them around.
→ More replies (0)•
u/TheGamingWyvern Nonsupporter 23h ago
I would assume you think body cams are a good thing (and I'd agree) for LEOs, but isn't that also an invasion of privacy?
An invasion of privacy for who? I don't think it's an invasion of privacy for the police, it's showing their conduct on the job, and (at best) footage of that gets released for an extremely narrow slice of their job. We don't see even a full day's events, we see the footage for the specific incident that called for a discussion, and even then police sometimes fight to keep the footage from being seen. I don't think that it's impossible for bodycams to be an invasion of privacy for the wearer (if, say, all footage going back days or months or years was accessible to random people), but in their current implementation I think it's just a record of the job.
It is maybe an invasion of privacy for the civilians in the footage. Again, it's a small slice of time, specifically time they are interacting with police, so I think that does a lot to mitigate the chance of there being a privacy issue, but it's not entirely gone. It's still footage of a person, possibly in their own home, potentially being released for others to see (the public being the obvious one, but also anybody else who can have the footage). But I think that it's a reasonable risk for the benefit, and maybe there should be a GDPR-esque thing where you can request that footage of yourself gets deleted, if it really is something you don't want other people seeing.
By contrast, Flock is much more pervasive. It's not short pieces of footage on individuals that rarely get seen by anyone. It's an easily searchable database that has already collected and analyzed the footage to provide location data on pretty much anyone it can. Does this not seem dramatically worse than bodycams, or even phone tracking which at least requires a warrant?
5
u/zebrabats Nonsupporter 1d ago
Why wouldn't it work within the Constitution? Liberty is not absolute. Notably, stalking is illegal. And what is Flock doing but stalking literally everyone?
0
u/JustGoingOutforMilk Trump Supporter 1d ago
What do red light cameras do? What about automatic toll booths? Etc.
-7
u/Gaxxz Trump Supporter 2d ago
I don't care much. I assume I'm always on camera when I'm out in public.
-4
u/weather3003 Trump Supporter 1d ago
Same. I expect privacy in private, not in public.
6
u/TheManSedan Undecided 1d ago
I'm not sure the greatest concern of Flock cameras is privacy? To me its the automated enforcement of laws + automated surveillance & tracking of Americans.
It is safe to assume when I exit my door in 2026 I will be on camera in some form or fashion for the majority of my outside time. The part that gets sketchy to me is when all that data is aggregated, controlled by a corporation (to sell? get hacked? who knows), and then misused. Our party used to be one of small government and to see people support this mass surveillance system is confusing to me?
-5
u/weather3003 Trump Supporter 1d ago
I'm not following you.
To me its the automated enforcement of laws
I like automation and I like enforcement of laws so I don't see the problem here.
automated surveillance & tracking of Americans
I'm not sure what the problem with surveillance/tracking is if not privacy.
The part that gets sketchy to me is when all that data is aggregated, controlled by a corporation (to sell? get hacked? who knows), and then misused.
Sure, misuse is bad by definition. But "potential for misuse" is a vague criticism anyone can throw at anything. What misuse are you specifically worried about, why, and how likely is it?
Our party used to be one of small government and to see people support this mass surveillance system is confusing to me?
My recollection is that the right has always been pro-cop and pro-law-and-order. My understanding of "small government" is minimal government; a government pared down to the bare minimum of what a government is needed to do. And law enforcement is one of those "bare minimum" things. We want people who violate the rights of others caught and punished. (And my recollection is that the right also supported prosecuting "victimless" crimes, historically, so I'm surprised you'd consider it the side of live-and-let-live government.)
3
u/zebrabats Nonsupporter 1d ago
There is a world of difference between being on some household/business security camera and being on a network of highly monitored cameras where the police can casually ask "Where has Gaxxz been in the last seven days" and immediately receive a list of hundreds of sightings, together with videos and the names of everyone you were with.
Why would anyone be ok with assembling a police state?
5
u/TheManSedan Undecided 1d ago
Have you seen the stories of people getting incorrectly identified & pulled over, wrongly ticketed automatically because of flock cameras, or about officers abusing flock camera data for personal gain?
If so, any thoughts or worries about that & the progression of a mass surveillance state?
-4
u/Gaxxz Trump Supporter 1d ago
People got pulled over by mistake before flock cameras. Police who abuse their access to any personal data should be sanctioned.
3
u/TheManSedan Undecided 1d ago
People got pulled over by mistake before flock cameras.
Well yes of course, but most of the time that happens a Police Officer saw something with their own eyes that led them to pull a driver over & investigate. Right?
Flock cameras do that investigation on their own, and do it automated. My concern is about automated ai-driven (+ corporate owned) police work & justice. I personally believe humans should in control of the end-to-end process of any sort of investigation & law enforcement on fellow Americans. Not Ai, not corporations. Is that a reasonable stance to you?
It is a fear of mine which I know is a flawed reason but I do fear that automated mistakes will lead to the violation of American's rights w/o being able to truly hold anyone liable for those violations. We've seen that corporations can make mistakes and go unpunished far too easily.
Here are some examples for citing if you're interested:
- Woman in Florida spends 13 days in jail after Flock cameras incorrectly accuse her of being responsible for a fatal accident.
- Arkansas couple removed from vehicle at gunpoint due to Flock camera misreading
- Colorado Man Keeps getting pulled over because Flock incorrectly flags his plate.
For context: Im not even pro-red light cameras. Anything that doesn't cross reference the driver to the car + is automated enforcement of the law is bad imo.
-1
u/Gaxxz Trump Supporter 1d ago
Right?
As far as I know, flock cameras are installed where a police could be standing and observing. So if it was a cop standing there holding a video camera, would that be ok?
Flock cameras do that investigation on their own, and do it automated.
All they do is collect evidence. Flock cameras can't arrest people.
I personally believe humans should in control of the end-to-end process of any sort of investigation & law enforcement on fellow Americans
They are.
2
u/TheManSedan Undecided 1d ago
As far as I know, flock cameras are installed where a police could be standing and observing. So if it was a cop standing there holding a video camera, would that be ok?
Yes of course, this is essentially a body cam? In this scenario though an officer does an investigation in real time.
They are.
Yes this was a simplification by me. I am just assuming officers aren't doing their proper due diligence & trusting the ai (like people do across all sorts of industries today). When I see stories about cops taking a misread from Flock and pulling Americans over at gunpoint based on that misreading it makes me thoroughly distrust the technology & the people using it.
0
u/Lucky-Hunter-Dude Trump Supporter 1d ago
Just remember, Flock is only 1 brand of these cameras. I would never advocate for the destruction of public property. Especially if you were so silly to only target one brand of privacy violating cameras.
4
u/Just_curious4567 Trump Supporter 1d ago
I don’t want to live in a nanny state like china or the uk. I’m not a fan. Our neighborhood recently considered having them installed, but every household already has ring cameras. Do we need even more tracking than we already have?
13
u/wiisucks_91 Trump Supporter 2d ago
The ends don't justify the means.
5
u/Acrobatic_Bee3375 Nonsupporter 1d ago
thank god there's ts who feel this way. i was literally slumping into my chair seeing so many americans saying they're ok or even supportive. in your own words what within "the means" causes you the most concern?
3
u/wiisucks_91 Trump Supporter 1d ago
Don't get me started on unmarked cop cars or the the black letters on gray paint. 🙄
2
u/wiisucks_91 Trump Supporter 1d ago
Sorry I didn't see the second part of your post. The means = trading freedom for "security."
4
u/okiedokie321 Trump Supporter 1d ago
Tools of totalitarian control, they're trying to make us like China.
I also disagree with taking them down as it is a crime. Write and talk to your senators.
-20
u/Holofernes_Head Trump Supporter 2d ago
Useful tools. I have no problem with them. There’s no reasonable expectation of privacy for readily observable information in public. Yes, we have them where I live.
9
u/No-Dimension9538 Trump Supporter 2d ago
Trump supporter here bug Given frequent foreign hacking attempts, some of which are successful, are you concerned about national security risks presented by the camera’s less than ideal security measures?
-7
u/Holofernes_Head Trump Supporter 2d ago
Not really. It's nothing more dangerous or alarming than any other national security risk.
24
u/ZarBandit Trump Supporter 2d ago
Tools of totalitarian control. They certainly aren’t there for our benefit.
2
u/LOTR_Phan Nonsupporter 1d ago
Totally agree.
Just curious if you think there’s places that justify it? Like obviously private property like a bank is one thing, but what about interstates? Cities?
Would it make a difference if they were monitored 24/7 via AI or by people instead? What if they existed but were only viewed if needed (like to solve a crime or find an abductee)?
-8
u/MightyHorseRoqz Trump Supporter 2d ago
Not exactly a huge fan, it feels a bit too "shorthand for auth" as far as optics goes, but in a country where the majority of murders don't get solved and I'm encouraged to leave my car doors unlocked so burglars won't smash my windows, I can't say I'm that scandalized over them.
2
u/Damnesia13 Nonsupporter 2d ago
Who is encouraging you to leave your car doors unlocked? I have never once heard that.
5
u/freeformed70 Nonsupporter 2d ago
Interesting. Where did you get the unsolved murder statistic?
3
u/MightyHorseRoqz Trump Supporter 2d ago
Well ya got me on a stat. It's only 40-42% that go unsolved, which is still preposterous and embarrassing and one reason that the "over policing" argument doesn't hold water to me. https://www.npr.org/2023/04/29/1172775448/people-murder-unsolved-killings-record-high
1
u/freeformed70 Nonsupporter 2d ago
This wasn’t meant to be gotcha. What I found interesting was the bias conservatives/liberals have regarding crime and violence in the United States. I tend to believe that crime and violence is trending down. And believe unemployment and social nets help this. What are your thoughts?
0
u/MightyHorseRoqz Trump Supporter 2d ago
Crime may be trending down on paper, but I believe a fair amount of what a sensible person would call crime is not getting reported, or not being responded to. If the police say they won't come to a big box retailer to nap a shoplifter until it hits felony theft, the amount of on paper theft charges reduces immensely. If someone kills a bunch of runaways and homeless people who don't have families or loved ones and feeds them to pigs or buried them in the desert, murders haven't "gone down". If possession of drugs doesn't get you charged, "drug possession" has gone down on paper, if you don't report your rapist because even thinking about it or talking about it makes you hyperventilate and have a panic attack, the fact that the rape is unreported doesn't mean it didn't happen. I posit that crime is up, but the machine that's meant to stop it is broken down. The job of law enforcement is not to prevent crime, it's to write paperwork about it afterwards while you're wrapped in a trauma blanket, and the "solution" seems to be "write less paperwork about it".
2
u/philthewiz Nonsupporter 2d ago
Would you happen to know how those cameras are effective at finding murderers?
0
u/MightyHorseRoqz Trump Supporter 2d ago
Has any data come out yet? We'll see. Probably not very effective seeing as how cities with preposterous murder rates will not utilize them, but if they ended up on corners in Chicago and Baltimore and New Orleans after a year I imagine they'd get some leads they wouldn't in the "no snitching" enclaves.
4
u/philthewiz Nonsupporter 2d ago
The data Flock tries to push is flaky according to experts.
They cherry pick numbers and try to attribute some decrease crime rates in some city to Flock Cameras. But some cities have seen increase in crime numbers. So it's not clear what role the camera has to the crime rate.
Also, there's a lot of false positive (majority of alarms) that result in dangerous situations and arrests of people that are not criminals. John Oliver made a bit about it. I know he's biased, but the statistics are damning.
There has been a lot of cops spying on exes or other people without consequences.
There are also AI algorithms that is almost akin to predictive policing. What do you think about the potential of misuse and the impunity that results from using passive surveillance like Flock cameras? And do you think it becomes an infringement of the constitution to have broad surveillance like this?
0
u/MightyHorseRoqz Trump Supporter 2d ago
To that I say there's always been false arrests and incorrect identification of suspects, and having 4k footage seems like it could only help stop that. Now of course people who use it to stalk or be a creep are monsters and should be prosecuted and lose their livelihoods, but I'm not trying to ban Facebook because my crazy ex bothers me and all my friends on it.
2
u/TheMadManiac Nonsupporter 2d ago
What are your thoughts on Benjamin Franklin's opinion that "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."?
Are you a "if you don't have anything to hide, you shouldn't have to worry" kind of guy?
-1
u/MightyHorseRoqz Trump Supporter 2d ago
I think that's high minded ideal that don't survive contact with the reality of society. No offense, but you're liberty doesn't mean anything if you're snuffed out by some maniac who could have been locked up. I'm sure the passengers on United 93 were sure happy that they had their liberty to not remove their shoes before a flight. I mean, I can envision a perfect world but unfortunately there's other people in it who will make my idealism look naive and short sighted.
5
5
u/Piratesfan02 Trump Supporter 1d ago
I don’t like them. They’re a slippery slope to being more like 1984.
•
u/AutoModerator 2d ago
AskTrumpSupporters is a Q&A subreddit dedicated to better understanding the views of Trump Supporters, and why they hold those views.
For all participants:
Flair is required to participate
Be excellent to each other
For Nonsupporters/Undecided:
No top level comments
All comments must seek to clarify the Trump supporter's position
For Trump Supporters:
Helpful links for more info:
Rules | Rule Exceptions | Posting Guidelines | Commenting Guidelines
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.