They should have to get a warrant, because of the fourth amendment.
Comment on Flock is canceled—and its competitors are profiting
Vodulas@beehaw.org 1 month agoConsider the ridiculous amount of stalking from cops using these cameras, no, I don’t think people would be OK with only local cops having access
dan@upvote.au 1 month ago
Vodulas@beehaw.org 1 month ago
Should, yes, but they won’t. Cops in the US are some of the most corrupt people. The simpler and safer solution is to not have the cameras at all. Mass surveillance is never the answer
theneverfox@pawb.social 1 month ago
If the cops were in control, they’d be violating the fourth amendment when they do that without going to the courts
Where as if it’s a private service the police department pays for, it’s a legal gray area
Vodulas@beehaw.org 1 month ago
Stalking is also illegal. Doesn’t seem to stop them
theneverfox@pawb.social 1 month ago
I’m not saying I trust the police. I’m saying if it’s outright unconstitutional to access without the courts, the IT department is going to put checks in the system
It’s like how you can’t trust HR to protect you personally, but you can rely on them to protect the organization
Vodulas@beehaw.org 1 month ago
I understand it is unconstitutional. My point is that it simply does not matter to the cops. Again, the easier thing is to not have cameras at all. Systems can be circumvented. Not having the cameras at all makes it so nobody can abuse them. Mass surveillance is not necessary or good.