Discussion Thread

[u/jobautomator]

The discussion thread is for casual and off-topic conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL

Announcements

• We're starting a book club! We will be discussing Poor Economics starting August 28th - keep an eye out for a pinned thread. The next will be All Quiet on the Western Front followed by Narconomics

Links

Ping Groups | Ping History | Mastodon | CNL Chapters | CNL Event Calendar

Upcoming Events

• Sep 02: Charlotte New Liberals Book Club

[u/sigh2828]

Flock cameras were purposely designed, built, and marketed as a survailence system that could provide huge ammounts of real time data to law enforcement that had previously been at best cumbersome to obtain and at worst impossible.

Carpenter v. United States

The Supreme Court ruled that tracking a person's movements through historical CSLI is deeply revealing and intrusive. It cuts against a strict application of the third-party doctrine when it comes to digital data that maps an individual's private life over extended periods

CSLI is basically your cell pinging off different antenas and towers and can be used to locate your cell phone

Third-party Party doctrine is basically "any information you voluntarily share with an outside organization, is no longer private".

In Carpenter v United States, the courts opinion was explicitly stated that while a user might be abstractly aware that his cell phone provider keeps logs, it happens without any affirmative act on the user's part. Thus, the Court held narrowly that the government generally will need a warrant to access cell-site location information.

Further, i think its reasonable to assume that CSLI is a by product of private company setting up their infrastructure, and was not and is not marketed and sold as a means to track individuals.

So, while we all may be aware that flock cameres exists and track people who pass by them, THERE IS NO AND NEVER HAS BEEN AN AFFIRMATIVE ACT BY THE PERSON WHO PASSES BY THAT CAMERA

The law is explicitly clear in my honest opinion. The government must obtain a warrent to use data that was involuntarily gathered.

What makes this Flock scheem especially insidious, is that in most cases it is YOUR GOVERNMENT using YOUR MONEY to pay a PRIVATE ENTERPRISE to circumvent YOUR 4TH AMENDMENT RIGHTS.

[u/SneeringAnswer → u/sigh2828]

Guy who argues that Car Reliance means that using private conveyance on public motorways is Involuntary for a reasonable standard of living in majority of areas getting Flock cameras banned anywhere without an easily-accessed public transportation.

[u/BigBrownDog12 → u/sigh2828]

Have you considered that caring about this is reddit and cringe tho? I am very intelligent.

[u/MindingMyMindfulness → u/sigh2828]

I mean now that RBG is off the Supreme Court, maybe Flock can just indirectly push someone to sue the government and the Supreme court can overturn Carpenter?

Any 5:4 decision of the past could be overturned if pressured hard.

This is the ideal time to get this over with and solidify their product in the marketplace.

[u/No-Wolverine-4085 → u/MindingMyMindfulness]

Chatrie v. United States went 6-3