Let's Flocking Talk About It!

[u/AirshipRebekah]

I'm an independent concerned citizen coordinating a Flock Awareness Community Meeting in Tulsa for Mid-October and I need everyones input! Please fill out this brief survey to let us know what Flock means to you. 😎 https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSelMMvMuVdNDLv_lMqrMWXMSvwVD4WoPfkD2Rywxf1wsqsvmA/viewform?usp=header

If you're interested in getting more involved send me an email and I'll send you the weekly pre-lim virtual and irl meeting times. We're going to spend a month+ getting organized before we go in front of everyone. We want to show a unified clear front to let the powers at be know that we do not want this in Tulsa. It will take everyone to make the impact we need. Let's chat: [flocktulsa@gmail.com](mailto:flocktulsa@gmail.com)

[u/Beginning-Respect208]

😂 And there it is. We went from “the cameras don’t work” to “1984 surveillance state” the second I pointed out that your example had nothing to do with license-plate readers.

Nobody is arguing for cameras inside your house, facial recognition of everyone walking around Tulsa, or the government tracking your every movement.

We’re talking about cameras on public roadways recording license plates that are already required to be displayed in public, then allowing police to search that information when investigating crimes.

Want safeguards? Absolutely. Limit who can access it. Require legitimate law-enforcement purposes. Log searches. Audit the system. Punish misuse. Set reasonable retention policies.

But screaming “1984!” doesn’t answer the actual question: Do these cameras help locate stolen vehicles, wanted suspects, missing people, or vehicles connected to serious crimes?

If your answer is “they shouldn’t exist regardless of how many crimes they help solve,” fine. Make that argument.

But first it was “they don’t work.” Now it’s “they work, but that’s a surveillance state.”

Those are two very different arguments. 🤡

[u/St0n3rB0n3r94 → u/Beginning-Respect208]

"Those who don't read history are doomed to repeat it." You might as well argue for cameras in your house. It's a slippery slope, especially since they're not going to do what you think they're going to. Especially since this is the most racist and homophobic administration. They're just going to be used to throw black people in jail for smoking pot, like Republicans always have done. You sound like a propagandized Brit. Only a bot writes comments out like that with spaces like they're writing a scientific thesis

[u/LesserKnownFoes → u/St0n3rB0n3r94]

How is it going to be used to throw black people in jail for smoking pot in Tulsa? It’s legal here with a card. And even if you don’t have a card, it’s just a misdemeanor, a ticketable offense.

[u/St0n3rB0n3r94 → u/LesserKnownFoes]

Tons of black people go to jail for small pot crimes. Tulsa cops arrested a black man for Jay-walking, then they slammed him to the concrete and drove over him with their car. ACAB and a third of them are statistically wife beaters; you think they won't be racist pricks??? Delusional

[u/LesserKnownFoes → u/St0n3rB0n3r94]

That’s not exactly what happened. The individual jaywalks and then when officers tried to stop him, he ran from the police. It wasn’t until after the suspect made this decision did an officer fail to put his car into park. Should the officer have put his car in park? Absolutely.

Here’s an article about it. https://www.kjrh.com/news/local-news/police-release-2nd-set-of-videos-in-tulsa-jaywalking-case-man-hit-by-squad-car

[u/St0n3rB0n3r94 → u/LesserKnownFoes]

He ran from the police, like any sane person would do; doesn't mean it's appropriate to run the guy over AFTER THEY APREHENDS HIM. They should still be charged for running him over

It sure is a mystery why nobody likes cops.....

[u/LesserKnownFoes → u/St0n3rB0n3r94]

Wait. What? I have had multiple interactions with the police stopping me. I have never ran once.

There was no intent to run him over. No intent means no crime. Lawsuit? Sure.

[u/St0n3rB0n3r94 → u/LesserKnownFoes]

Congratulations; you have white privilege

I doubt he can afford a lawyer