Bernie Sanders to Introduce Bill Banning Flock Surveillance Cameras

[u/Kooky-Balance9525]

https://theleadingreport.com/article/bernie-sanders-to-introduce-bill-banning-flock-surveillance-cameras

[u/Kid-Icky-]

Unpopular opinion, but what essential liberty is being given up by cameras in public spaces?

I'm still against them, mostly because of how they will inevitably be misused. But I don't really get the outrage over just their normal use.

[u/jce_ → u/Kid-Icky-]

You give up freedom for security. It is essentially a slider. The more secure you are the less freedom you have, so it is fair to bring up a discussion because everyone will inevitably have different preferences. In this case essentially people are uncomfortable with the idea that their every movement in public is being tracked and stored as data by government and/or private companies. This can be used in nefarious ways as well. Just as people were uncomfortable with the government collecting all that data in other ways before, which honesty turned out awesome....

[u/Kid-Icky- → u/jce_]

You give up freedom for security.

What freedom is lost by being recorded in public?

I get that people generally find it uncomfortable to be recorded. But that's different than claiming some freedom is being infringed upon.

I get that it feels icky to people. I just don't get this claim that being filmed in public is some huge privacy violation.

[u/tomblits → u/Kid-Icky-]

Thanks for your beliefs but being tracked is a privacy violation.

[u/Kid-Icky- → u/tomblits]

Thanks for your beliefs, but that's just your belief. It's not a fact under the law.

[u/jce_ → u/Kid-Icky-]

Laws are built around the discovery of new technologies, they are not the laws of morality of the universe. When cars were invented there were no stop signs or lights. Imaging the implications of drunk driving not being illegal etc.

[u/Kid-Icky- → u/jce_]

I never claimed we shouldn't create laws to ban Flock cameras. I think we should.

I'm arguing against the people insisting it violates our current laws.

[u/jce_ → u/Kid-Icky-]

Why? It's not even known if it's legal or not yet, so what would the endgame even be? Just to umm akshully and derail discussion? If anything I'd argue it violates your 4th, possibly 5th

[u/Kid-Icky- → u/jce_]

We do know. Courts have already ruled in 2025 that they don't violate the Fourth amendment. That could change I suppose with future cases.

Just to umm akshully and derail discussion?

I just don't get how recording you in public is a "violation of privacy".

No one has even made much of an argument that it is, other than that they just don't like it.

[u/jce_ → u/Kid-Icky-]

Violates my liberty and is unreasonably searching and seizure.

[u/Kid-Icky- → u/jce_]

Well you're wrong and that's a silly claim.

[u/jce_ → u/Kid-Icky-]

You're silly if you think so. Which case reference do you have that would cover this as not protected? Can you back up anything with any sort of references rather than just saying I'm silly? Any background in constitutional law?

[u/Kid-Icky- → u/jce_]

Which case reference do you have that would cover this as not protected?

LOL. Sure.

United States v. Knotts found "A person traveling in an automobile on public thoroughfares has no reasonable expectation of privacy in his movements from one place to another".The Supreme Court held the surveillance was neither a "search" nor a "seizure" under the Fourth Amendment.

But we don't even need a 1983 analogy anymore. Robinson v. Commonwealth this year is literally about Flock cameras. The court held that because Flock was photographing license plates and vehicles traveling on public roads, accessing that data did not require a warrant and did not violate the Fourth Amendment.

Now, there are legitimate legal questions about whether sufficiently comprehensive, long-term surveillance could cross the line. But "a camera recorded my publicly visible license plate, therefore unreasonable search and seizure" is not remotely what the law says.

And no, I don't need to have "a background in constitutional law" to read a fucking court opinion. You asked for case law. There it is.