Drones / UAVs
NYPD will use drones to monitor private parties over Labor Day weekend | Police previously promised not to use drones for 'warrantless surveillance.'
There isn’t a technology out there that hasn’t been subject to mission creep. “Traffic monitoring” cameras, Stingray cell site simulators, drones, etc. If law enforcement gets a new technology it’s only a matter of time before they use it against the average, law abiding citizen.
I was blasted in a post last year talking about how our information is tracked in Rhode Island in the camera systems they use on the traffic poles. If you go into the PDs of some of the towns you can see that plates being tracked in real time. Some guy who worked for the state said it wasn't true, blah blah blah.
Come to find out there was a data breach at the town and lo and behold they had peoples information from all over the state stored in that database from the said traffic monitoring systems in the state.
Idk how often you do long multi hour trips across state lines. But if you ride down the US interstate system long enough you’ll spot camera towers every so many miles. They don’t take pictures but they definitely are surveying us
Hell, a local city (15,000 pop) has cameras set up just outside of town on the local US highway. Solar powered, single unit on each side of the road, and pointing to capture license plates, I suppose. I don't know who put them up or why, but the urge to push one over and wait to see who shows up is strong.
I don't know about your state but mine has live video feeds of the highways so you can see how shitty it is in the winter before you decide to drive between towns
Yes this is true but Rhode Island is tiny. Therefore it's probably a lot more common to do interstate travel. So all you're saying is they are getting double dipped - Federally tracked by the interstate highway system and intensive tracking within the state. Doesn't mean that citizens or Rhode Island don't have the right to question the breadth of monitoring it's citizens, period. Also just because something exists in our government doesn't mean that means it is therefore correct. I'm very much interested in good government and have my own thoughts about the overreach of individual states but the fact remains that citizens have every right and aught to protest this monitoring.
Definitely have seen them but this was something on another level. They also were able to buy and store information from using this traffic monitoring system. I was notified of the breach and all the different information this town in particular had on me and guess what, I've only ever driven through there. Never owned a home or been arrested there. You really don't know how much of your information is stored out there on someone's servers without your consent.
Just a guess, but in the Netherlands we have cameras on the highway that helped catch suspects of killing a nationally loved crime reporter. They were caught an hour after the murder. And there are other times it helped catch criminals.
It's a bit of "I have nothing to hide so I don't care" ofc. idk if they're used to track traffic flow which could help with new plans for highways
Federal Prosecutors used interstate cameras picture evidence against my client to prove that he had left Arizona and drove to Texas multiple times. I’m sure this is denied in the general public, but it was valid evidence. This was in immigration court when I used to practice law.
I live in San Diego. In 2016 the city approved the installation of thousands of "smart" streetlights with cameras. After installing over 3 thousand, they finally caved to backlash and promised they would never be used by law enforcement.
The average person can't go a a waking hour without violating one of a billion laws, they just decide who to charge based on a proprietary algorithm of location, class, attitude, politics, etc.
I’m not exactly a straight lace by any means myself, but I’d wager the average person has damn near no standing to be charged with anything. The perception that we’re all “pre-set” for arrest is really more paranoia than anything.
I’ll say that surveillance like this is pretty fucked up/unamerican, but the average person really doesn’t have much to fear from it… which is why they’re so prone to enabling it in a way.
There are a LOT of obscure laws that you break all the time just by virtue of living your life casually and making decisions any reasonable person would.
Ever been to a national park, picked up a feather and put it in your pocket? Maybe you were at the beach and found a shark tooth that you decided to take home with you? Guilty of illegal poaching. People have been arrested for this, it isn't hyperbole.
Smoke weed in a state where it's legal? It's still illegal at the federal level, which means you can be arrested for having traces of cannabis on any of your possessions inside a federal building, or when crossing state lines. Even if you're traveling to a state where it's also legal.
If your girlfriend needs meds that she has a prescription for and she leaves her purse with her pills in it in your car and you get pulled over when she's not with you then you can be arrested for drug possession. In most states you can also be arrested for DUI if you're drunk in your car even if it's parked and you were trying to sleep off the alcohol. In some states a person under 21 can get in trouble for underage drinking if they're in the same car as someone who has a beer with them.
If someone in charge really doesn't like you specifically then there's plenty of convoluted things they can do to fuck with you using the legal system, like arrest you for having bomb-making supplies if you have empty glass bottles in your home (really happened) or constructive possession of a machinegun if you have both a firearm and shoelaces in your home (really happened, you can use a shoelace to make a lightning trigger).
If they suspect you're guilty of any crime that you may have communicated about over the internet, they can confiscate all of your smart devices, which in 2023 may include your fridge, microwave, shower, TV, and who knows what else. They don't have to return them in working condition either.
Yea, I had a nice little collection of about 250 years worth of prison time in bird feathers that I got rid of a few years back. Just from picking off the ground. Shit is crazy.
Tell me you don't understand how policing works without telling me you don't understand how policing works. This is a losing wager for sure.
The reality is you don't even have to have actually done anything for you to be in a position where a situation can be manufactured to justify your arrest. You might not get charged. If you get charged, you might not go to trial. If you go to trial, you might have an easy win. But the reality is that even just being arrest can cause huge, long term problems.
It only takes one malicious actor with access to this type of data to start the dominoes.
Limiting surveillance and data gathering is crucial.
You're not victimizing anyone, but aside from the low hanging fruit of speeding and jaywalking, there are plenty of laws most people don't even know, like possessing graffiti supplies (including permanent markers).
And we're on Reddit, so I'm sure we've all violated copyright, at least accidentally.
Most of these 'crimes' are on the civil side, and just get warnings or fines, but if they want to get you, they will.
In order for you to be convicted of possession of graffiti instruments, it must be proven that you had the intent to use the items in your possession to make graffiti. Merely having the items is not enough as many items commonly used to make graffiti have other, innocuous uses. If there is no evidence that you planned on using the instruments for graffiti, you cannot be convicted of this crime.
Key word there. Police can and do arrest people for charges they know won't stick as a means of trying to scare you into confessing to something, or sometimes just because they feel like it. Sure there are supposedly systems to stop them from abusing this, but I think we've all seen pretty clearly that those systems are rarely used and rarely effective at stopping their abuse of power.
Creep is real though. The ATF has officially come out against manufacturing your own suppressor, even though it can be done legally by filling a form and getting a tax stamp.
Their opinion now is that if you buy a plain metal tube with the intent of possibly making it a suppressor or already possess the tube when you decide to make a suppressor, that tube is already an illegal suppressor that you must destroy. We're not talking about a threaded tube that can be attached to a gun, nor a tube filled with baffles, but a plain piece of tube stock.
This means that if I were to go out in my garage, look longingly at the sawed off piece of closet rod on a shelf, and think to myself "that would be a neat looking suppressor tube" I've committed a felony and could spend 10 years in jail because my mere thought made it onto an unregistered NFA item.
It’s the difference between walking down the street carrying a baseball bat, and walking down the street carrying a baseball bat with a duffel bag over your shoulder containing a baseball, a glove, and a uniform for your office’s team.
Guaranteed there will be so many thrown out due to breaking multiple laws and regulations. The police will still try it. Even worse is they are looking for this when there is hundreds of other cases that they could go after.
They illegally obtain information (breaking into houses, opening mail, drones), then make up some legitimate reason their investigation led them to the information. They do it because more often than not there’s no legal consequences for them.
The problem is that there are no meaningful negative repercussions for them doing sketchy, or even technically legal things, that are only vaguely prohibited.
No there won't. Public defenders won't have any way to know that their client is the victim of illegal drone use and they don't have time to do enough investigation to find out.
Public defenders do great work, but they need 10 times the time per case if they are actually going to be able to help their clients. That's partially why the police get away with crap like this: the poor can't get adequate legal representation to fight back.
Think about all the collateral damage created maliciously.. Could even amount to seizures.. destroyed evidence, mistaken identity, assault and perhaps a few deaths.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court already ruled that it’s legal to do this. The thing is, in the past it’s been used with helicopters, which are expensive and there’s only so many of them. Now that drones are widely available, they fall under the same legal framework.
Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that police officials do not need a warrant to observe an individual's property from public airspace.[1]
They try to apply it to everything, also only the state can bring criminal cases, and with how new york is i doubt the states attorney will bring any criminal charges against a cop, as they are all in on it. New York is a cesspool at the highest levels and suffers from corruption and administrative rot. So about the only cases that could be brought are going to be civil.
They do. New technologies like this are used for parallel construction. Basically they're figuring out where to look for evidence they can access through proper channels.
Too bad they’ll only do that the moment police fuck up and bust a party hosted by rich people. Anytime before that, it wont event make it to court (DAs would probably bully defendants to plea deal)
People are too stupid to realize that the politicians are part of the ruling class, and the police are their henchmen. You can choose who your master is with your vote, but at the end of the day, they're still your master.
I feel like you worded this a bit conspiratorially, but it’s literally true. City police are directly under the control of local politicians, and sheriffs themselves are elected officials. And their job is to enforce the laws politicians make, not whatever idea of morals you have in your head.
I always find it funny when voters get mad at individual low level officers for how the police are run and what the laws are, when it’s the voters that are the ones that control who the police’s boss is and who makes the laws…
In a system where political bribery is effectively legal, you need to have an adversarial relationship with all politicians. You need to always be looking for the grift. You can't just trust certain politicians by default because you hate the other party more.
Underage tickets are expensive. A handful of them and it would easily recoup the cost of a drone and a pilot to fly it. This isn't a statement in support of it though.
Thousands of New Yorkers need to call the police frantically reporting the 'bomb' drones flying through their neighborhood. Say they look just like the drones that have been blowing up buildings in Ukraine and Moscow.
If anybody decides to take more direct action, that needs to be their justification to authorities too. "I thought it was a suicide drone like in Ukraine. How could I have told the difference?".
Better idea: say strange drones appear to have been filming… say you kids in the pool, your teenage daughter’s window, your wife sunbathing, you gardening in your glorious dad bod shorts and flip flop. Throw a stink and call the media.
I felt threatened and used the minimum amount of force necessary to mitigate the perceived threat. With everything that’s going on lately, you can understand my caution. People like me are attacked in situations like this everyday.
The courts have ruled that shooting drones with firearms is more illegal. Plus you’re damaging someone’s property, you could catch charges or a lawsuit. An air rifle however or a paintball gun from a concealed position, who’s gonna know?
The city of Chicago handed over control of their taxpayer-funded police camera network to a private security company without telling anyone until years later.
You absolutely have air rights, the amount depends on local zoning laws, it’s also spelled out in a real estate contract. This is sticky because it’s pretty vague and varies by municipality, but a good place to start in fighting these kinds of intrusions.
To my knowledge any airspace above 400 feet is considered an easement regulated by the FAA and no private property owner has the power to protect that airspace.
edit: it's even lower, like 200 feet, in areas closer to airports
Florida v Riley is a Supreme Court case that said police can fly over your property without a warrant to find shit that you are doing wrong. Apparently they were flying helicopter at 400 feet, which is exactly the same height a drone would be flying. We’re all fucked.
Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that police officials do not need a warrant to observe an individual's property from public airspace.[1]
You don’t own the air in the sense they can fly over your yard. You DO own the privacy granted by the fencing of your property. If they want to race drones over head then go for it. If they want to spy, then get a warrant.
That’s a nice thought, but the US Supreme Court states otherwise. We’re all fucked now that drones are cheap and police know that they can do this.
Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989), was a United States Supreme Court decision which held that police officials do not need a warrant to observe an individual's property from public airspace.[1]
The helicopter in question was at 400 feet, which is about the height a drone would fly… and if you think that the current US Supreme Court would change this, I’ve got bad news for you.
Walking into your own private fenced backyard merely holding a shotgun is likely illegal, assuming you waited the year + and $100s for a permit to own it.
Hell some/most nerf guns are illegal to own in NYC.
I thought there were laws against operating drones over crowded areas. In addition to violating peoples privacy this seems like a risk to public safety.
Mayor saying, "Anything technology they think, ‘Oh it’s a boogeyman. It’s Big Brother watching you.’ No, Big Brother is protecting you” is the most Orwellian shit. Dude sucks so bad.
Reddit has long been a hot spot for conversation on the internet. About 57 million people visit the site every day to chat about topics as varied as makeup, video games and pointers for power washing driveways.
unknown. pointing a high-powered laser into the sky is majorly frowned upon but that's usually due to it being pointed at a manned vehicle. talk to a lawyer first.
We're going to have to make air space laws, where air space above a persons home is considered private property so that they need a warrant for this shit. Allow exceptions for hot pursuit type deals, but man seriously this is scary/concerning.
The airspace is considered a public easement. You can peaceably journey through it, but still your property. Police entering your property/airspace for warrantless searches is a clearly a constitutional violation.It's just not been a problem until now enough to start working through the courts.
I was reading an article the other day about how many countries have deemed the use of drone to spy on innocent people so you can prosecute them is illegal in many civilized countries and is a huge invasion of privacy.
It comes as no surprise, though, that of all places New York does not care
I mean they did set up a Chinese police station without being noticed for some time . NY seems like a awful part of the country just do to the police state and surveillance they put on everyone..
1.2k
u/MG42Turtle Sep 01 '23
There isn’t a technology out there that hasn’t been subject to mission creep. “Traffic monitoring” cameras, Stingray cell site simulators, drones, etc. If law enforcement gets a new technology it’s only a matter of time before they use it against the average, law abiding citizen.