there is a legal concept of what is called an "atractive nuisance" ie: something privatly owned but placed unatended in a public or highly visible place, which has long been known to contribute to bad behavior that otherwise would not occur, and also a much more serious crime of entrapment, which seems to be applicable in this case.
That the police would engage in these activities would normaly be inconcievable.
I'm curious about the memespace HN people inhabit. I've been hearing about Halloween is National DeFlock Day for a while -- anyone else come across this rapidly-spreading meme?
So your argument for accepting omnipresent surveillance systems is that opposing it "ruins" Halloween. Welp, we'll all have to hope that your once a year cosplay party is worth the number of lives ruined by Flock. Which, may I remind you, is used by law enforcement to stalk their romantic interests and also put innocent people behind bars.
> So your argument for accepting omnipresent surveillance systems is that opposing it "ruins" Halloween
No, if you abuse a day where everyone dresses up for fun to commit crimes, the fun dress-up part will no longer be tolerated.
If you still think that it's a good idea to have a purge night, foresight doesn't seem to be your strong point regardless as to whom or why they are oppressing you. Keep in mind that Flock is just another flavor of the day.
Also the stalking argument is old and stale: it's the same talking points presented with Facebook admins stalking loved one, and then again in the Snowden leaks... and then it becomes normalized after a while.
> I've been hearing about Halloween is National DeFlock Day for a while
According to you, that's "committing crimes." I know that times are different now, but thoughtcrimes and de facto criminalization without legal codification are supposed to be unjust and unconstitutional. It's even more ironic when someone so obsessed with law and order goes so far as to invent crimes while ignoring the actual crimes that prompted the protests in the first place. So hypocritical. Mass surveillance, stalking, and putting people behind bars without evidence is supposed to be illegal, you know.
Also, stalking is okay as long as it's normalized? Wow, that's literally the logic of predators. No wonder your reply is what it is. Our guiding ethics are incompatible on a fundamental level.
Not sure I have a problem with this.. police do sting operations all the time. A man had intent to solicit a prostitute and gets arrested during a sting operation. But there was never a real prostitute. Here a man had intent to destroy a Flock camera, but it was just a decoy that cost $0.
The $0 argument isn't really swaying me, his intent was clearly criminal.
This is an incredibly effective way to catch criminals. I wish police used more of these sting operations. I've seen videos where YouTubers set up a decoy to tempt all sorts of criminals, from package thieves to people stealing cars.If a YouTuber can lure someone that easily, no reason police can't do the same and arrest the handful of individuals that are terrorizing neighborhoods.
> The operation is reminiscent of Amazon “package sting” operations that several police departments attempted several years ago, in which empty Amazon boxes were placed on people’s porches while police officers watched. Those sting operations resulted in zero known arrests.
This is a device that tracks, stalks, and investigates individuals without their consent. Additionally, these are contracts that were entered into and that are forced upon people. People's resistance to these have been punished aggressively. (From the video of the public council meetings I've seen).
In addition these devices are setup to enforce state laws outside of where the law is relivant at. (I.e. a woman has been tracked outside of the state to evaluate compliance with abortion law in texas).
To me this shows it's a breakdown of the agreement of law between the citizens and the government.
Yes, destroying property is criminal. You can't go around destroying property because they're used in policies you don't agree with. If I think abortion is murder, can I go bomb abortion clinics?
Resistance to legal police work should be punished severely.
The damage estimate they use will be hypothetical total replacement cost, including multiple employees time, truck use, permits etc. its very trivial for any sort of repair to have a nominal cost in the thousands.
No, the point is that some of those crimes appear to require actual damages. Not hypothetical damage in another universe, not the amount someone wanted to damage things, but something with an an actual repair bill.
IANAL, but searching for the criminal-mischief over $1,000 charge brings up Florida Statute §806.13 [0] as a third-degree felony charge, but nothing in that section says attempts count as damage.
This is the same kind of case as someone arrested for cocaine possession when the drug is made of powder milk and caffeine with zero controlled substances. Prosecution has to prove the suspect was going to sell it as real drugs, it can't be illegal to have something on you just because it's possible to confuse for something else.
In this case they might need to prove that the man did not know the camera was a decoy, otherwise it's just misdemeanor vandalism or less. Proving a negative in a criminal case is hard and when it's about a person's mental state it might be literally impossible. We'll see.
29 comments
[ 0.26 ms ] story [ 14.2 ms ] threadBasically jury nullification
https://futurism.com/future-society/grand-jury-ohio-flock-al...
Whereas what you're thinking of is "we the jury think the defendant did, indeed, break the law. But we think the law sucks, so 'not guilty'."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification
No, if you abuse a day where everyone dresses up for fun to commit crimes, the fun dress-up part will no longer be tolerated.
If you still think that it's a good idea to have a purge night, foresight doesn't seem to be your strong point regardless as to whom or why they are oppressing you. Keep in mind that Flock is just another flavor of the day.
Also the stalking argument is old and stale: it's the same talking points presented with Facebook admins stalking loved one, and then again in the Snowden leaks... and then it becomes normalized after a while.
First time?
> I've been hearing about Halloween is National DeFlock Day for a while
According to you, that's "committing crimes." I know that times are different now, but thoughtcrimes and de facto criminalization without legal codification are supposed to be unjust and unconstitutional. It's even more ironic when someone so obsessed with law and order goes so far as to invent crimes while ignoring the actual crimes that prompted the protests in the first place. So hypocritical. Mass surveillance, stalking, and putting people behind bars without evidence is supposed to be illegal, you know.
Also, stalking is okay as long as it's normalized? Wow, that's literally the logic of predators. No wonder your reply is what it is. Our guiding ethics are incompatible on a fundamental level.
The $0 argument isn't really swaying me, his intent was clearly criminal.
That seems at-odds with the article's aside that:
> The operation is reminiscent of Amazon “package sting” operations that several police departments attempted several years ago, in which empty Amazon boxes were placed on people’s porches while police officers watched. Those sting operations resulted in zero known arrests.
This is a device that tracks, stalks, and investigates individuals without their consent. Additionally, these are contracts that were entered into and that are forced upon people. People's resistance to these have been punished aggressively. (From the video of the public council meetings I've seen).
In addition these devices are setup to enforce state laws outside of where the law is relivant at. (I.e. a woman has been tracked outside of the state to evaluate compliance with abortion law in texas).
To me this shows it's a breakdown of the agreement of law between the citizens and the government.
Resistance to legal police work should be punished severely.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=es5kDpyJkBU&t=12s
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/n7PgNlT8GP8
IANAL, but searching for the criminal-mischief over $1,000 charge brings up Florida Statute §806.13 [0] as a third-degree felony charge, but nothing in that section says attempts count as damage.
[0] https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Disp...
[1] https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Disp...
In this case they might need to prove that the man did not know the camera was a decoy, otherwise it's just misdemeanor vandalism or less. Proving a negative in a criminal case is hard and when it's about a person's mental state it might be literally impossible. We'll see.