a man was charged with three felonies after he cut down a 3D-printed "decoy" Flock camera, which was set up by police.

all 19 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 69 points 2 months ago

They just need the news stories to impart doubt. Doesn't matter if they aren't convicted.

Shit, they don't even really need to do it. They just need the news to say they are.

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago

    As a 3D printing enthusiast, I forever wish tangled filament and nozzle clogs to befall upon the cops who make these decoys.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago

    Couldn't they just "swoop in" on any camera? It's not like the decoy looks so much more inviting to destroy.

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago

    Those charges will not stick

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 2 months ago

    Time to stock up on black mannequins. Two can play at this game.

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago* (5 children)

    If they’re fake, how do they know if/when people are tampering with them?

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    It's a trap, they're watching them.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    So they can charge them with vandalising a fake piece made of plastic?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    It's still a real physical object being intentionally broken by someone that doesn't own it.

    Keep on mind, I'm absolutely NOT defending it, I'm just explaining the logic.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    I understand, but the value of the destroyed β€˜object’ is ridiculous so the penalty has to be minimal.

    Edit:

    Oh, and what if the β€˜culprit’ just covers the fake camera?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 26 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    Using force against individual cameras is not going to be succesful in the long run. It's like punching Nazis in the street... sure, it looks and feels good, but you're not hurting the people who benefit from having them around. They are laughing all the way to the bank.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 43 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I know it's not the 'correct' fight to have, but I think it's good to use the fact that anti-flock action is in the social media zeitgeist and keep supporting people; it is laying groundwork for civil disobedience we need.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago

    it’s good to use the fact that anti-flock action is in the social media zeitgeist

    It is in the social media zeitgeist - that's why piggy is capitalising on it with the above tactic. It's an escalation on their side, and it's a good one because they can make the small group of people willing to make physical attacks on their surveillance infrastructure even smaller through indimidation at little cost. The question is... does the other side have something of their own to play the escalation game?

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago* (4 children)

    What other options do we have?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • 28 comments in c/DeFlock@sh.itjust.works view that post
    [–] 61 points 2 months ago (5 children)

    That cops are spending time and effort to create fake circumstances (of a very real violation of rights) to arrest people that are acting from those societal rights being transgressed is disgusting.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Yes, it is truly tragic how flock cameras have perverted the goodwill and community stewardship of the police. /s

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    I am not sure why my comment deserved being shit on like that. As if I've praised them otherwise? This step they are taking is magnifying the "bastards" moniker and for sure in an exponentially shitty way.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 2 months ago (6 children)
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    Unfortunately not, entrapment involves coercing a person to commit a crime they wouldn't have otherwise. Simply giving someone an opportunity to commit a crime isn't considered entrapment under the law.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    Destroying a fake camera is a crime?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 2 months ago

    No it's the same scenario as a prostitution sting, or a bait car for vehicle thefts. They provide the false situation but they aren't convincing anyone to do anything, they are still choosing to commit that crime on their own.

    Even if whether these devices should even be legal in the first place is questionable. Legally, currently, they are private property being vandalized.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago

    I put out cardboard cutouts of minorities on the streets and film cops as they beat them up.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 2 months ago (9 children)

    I don't understand the charges because they appear to be based on real cameras

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (8 children)

    I don’t understand how the cops didn’t get shot at, but that’s just me.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 2 months ago (7 children)

    Why would people be shooting at the cops?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 2 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (4 children)

    Are you trying to be edgy and indicate that people should shoot all cops? Do you think that sounds reasonable?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (3 children)

    I’m not being edgy at all, magat.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (2 children)

    So you're essentially an anarchist who believes in killing random cops?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago (1 child)

    I don’t think that you know what an anarchist is, And I don’t think you understand what a cop does for a living. It’s not protect and serve… the people.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Isn’t that entrapment?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Dollar amount determines felony, how is that enough?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • 5 comments in c/usa@midwest.social view that post
    [–] 9 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    I want to see someone put up fake cameras till the cops take them down then report them

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    That's actually brilliant. Imagine just setting up the camera an inch from the other one and right in front of it, pointed at it.

    When you eventually get questioned, say you have a secret contract with city council.

    Heck just putting them up randomly and then claiming a secret contract would enrage Flock lmao.

  • source
  • parent