San Jose residents sue over privacy violating Flock safety cameras
(web.archive.org)
Comments (8)
sorted by:
Everyone would love mass surveillance if they actually used it to eliminate petty crime, but they don't. They use it to extract fees from the already law abiding because that's much easier and more profitable.
I had a Chinese Uber driver explain that to me a few months ago. He said there's no such crime in China because there's cameras everywhere and they actively use them.
In the west I'm sure it's racist, it would just be a black detector in the states and gypsy catcher in the EU.
Gypsies even when caught are immediately released...
The current Mayor Matt Mahan is running for governor, partly on "helping make San Jose the safest big city in America." He attributes the low crime rate to things like this and not the fact that San Jose is 40% Asian, 30% hispanic, 25% White, and 2-3% black. You can even find photo ops of him activating some of these cameras himself. Home values are also over a million on average
More than anything it's the high cost of living. Honestly I would gladly pay high taxes if it meant no ghetto people anywhere in the city, though San Jose still has tons of homeless
They use high taxes to import ghettos, and then use them as a justification to raise taxes to take care of the problems in/caused by the ghettos.
I know, I'm talking about a hypothetical fantasy land where governments actually work for the people
I used to live in that fantasy land, and it didn't even have the high taxes.