| ▲ | roxolotl 4 hours ago |
| There’s a lot of local US candidates running this year on pushing back on the federal government. Realistically there’s not a ton that can be done at the level of a mayor or even state senator. However removing local passive surveillance is something that can make a genuine impact. I’d love to see people running on banning red light/license plate cameras and other passive surveillance tools. If the data is never collected it can’t be abused. |
|
| ▲ | throwaway5752 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Realistically there’s not a ton that can be done at the level of a mayor or even state senator I wish people wouldn't say that, it's not the case. First, pushback requires equivalent effort. If 10,000 towns are uncooperative because 10,000 mayors resist this, the amount of political power to overcome this is incredibly large. The mayors can delay or cancel projects with uncooperative or malicious vendors. They can slow down approvals. This administration and the powers that want this espionage power understand this, which is why they target downstream races, school boards, and sheriff positions. Second, a state senator is much, much more powerful than you give them credit. There are usually much fewer of them than members of the US House or Senate, so they individually more voting power. They can substantially influence state politics, and it is magnified with majorities and committees. Third, resources are pooled and parties coordinate, so starving them of influence, which is root of all their funding, is key to voting undemocratic parties out of office. Don't believe what you read about politics online. It is made for modern, shallow consumption. Little races matter. You can make a large difference by participating directly, too. You don't even have to make a scene about it in your platform. Just run, be boring, win, and talk with your votes. |
| |
| ▲ | throwaway85825 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Change is a lot faster and cheaper at the local level. It only took millions to elect DAs across the country to let violent criminals back on the street same day. | |
| ▲ | dangus 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | One major example is how Chicago Public Schools has a non-cooperation policy and a policy to refuse warrantless access to school property for ICE agents. The school district also refuses to consider immigration status as a prerequisite to enrollment in the school system. This is a huge deal since any state or local school district could decide to do the exact opposite. This makes nearly every minor inaccessible to immigration enforcement officers during business hours. | | |
| ▲ | throwaway5752 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | Absolutely. Run for the HOA board, run for the school board, run for the town council. Write a letter. Show up to a town hall meeting. Everything makes a difference and people here are more than sufficiently qualified. We have lots of software developers being laid off. An elected position serves as resume filler, too. You'd be shocked what a difference you can make when you try a little. | | |
| ▲ | rightbyte an hour ago | parent [-] | | Ye I more or less got scared with how fast you gain real influence as a local politician by just showing up to some party meetings. I thought there would be a longer vetting period but it is like "oh you breath and don't cite opposing party lines too often we will nominate you for this and this and ...". |
|
| |
| ▲ | Forgeties79 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | to add to this, if local governments refuse to install the hardware that the federal government wants to tap into, then there’s nothing for them to tap into. It’s a lot harder for the federal government to go around placing all these tools around the country than it is for them to simply vacuum up what is already there. If anybody wants to see the power of controlling local government and its upstream impact, look no further than mom’s for liberty and their assault on school boards nationwide. | | |
|
|
| ▲ | engineer_22 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This might seem cynical, but it appears to me the uniparty has already decided it wants a total surveillance state. Having achieved total coverage of the observable domestic cyber realm, the next objective is a physical layer. Anyone arguing against it is a terrorist sympathizer or has criminal intent. This is for the safety of the homeland, after all. |
|
| ▲ | dangus 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| This is also why car dependent infrastructure is a bad thing for Americans’ freedom. You have more civil rights as a pedestrian than you do in a licensed motor vehicle. |
| |
| ▲ | ww520 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Facial and gait recognition tech make the pedestrian vs car point moot. | |
| ▲ | dgellow 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Facial recognition has been used in train stations, unfortunately | |
| ▲ | engineer_22 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Pedestrians are limited to a ~20 mile radius. Travelling further, without a car, then requires use of public transportation and by using public transportation depending where you are you have implied consent to being searched "for safety". Acknowledging civil asset forfeiture is a problem in some jurisdictions, private automobiles still provide a greater expectation of privacy than public modes of transport. | | |
| ▲ | dangus 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | First I would question why anyone has to drive 20 miles to reach basic needs like grocery stores and employers. Isn’t that already a failure of urban and suburban planning? Existing on public transit is not an automatic agreement to be searched as you describe. Here’s an attorney website that describes your general rights: https://azharillc.com/blog/youre-riding-the-l-train-can-cops... There are many more things that are illegal for you to be doing as a driver of a car versus existing in public on public transportation. Many of these things can trigger searching your possessions being legal compared to being a person on public transit. You’re also required to present your drivers license and fully identify yourself if you are stopped for minor traffic infractions like a tail light being out. As a pedestrian, in most states you do not have to present ID to an officer on the street. For example, it’s generally not probable cause to search on public transit if an officer smells alcohol, while in a vehicle it’s basically an automatic search of your whole car. You would also have the issue of what a court or jury thinks of the reasonableness of the search based on the context. If you’re quietly minding your own business on the train and you smell like alcohol is a judge or jury going to think the search was reasonable? Now compare that to a driver in a vehicle smelling like alcohol. Furthermore, the whole concept of a DUI checkpoint where every person is stopped and questioned is at the very least impractical and often illegal for pedestrians. Thank you for your service as the incorrect carbrain of the day. | | |
| ▲ | tocs3 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | First I would question why anyone has to drive 20 miles to reach basic needs like grocery stores and employers. Isn’t that already a failure of urban and suburban planning? I live in central TX and until recently it has been fairly rural. It is now very suburban and it is very common to have to drive 20 miles or so for groceries. There are also lots of traffic lights. For most there is almost no practical way to get to any consumer business on foot and no public transport. Twenty years ago it was "living in the country" and travailing for anything was just part of the deal to live here. It is about the same but with the added joys of traffic, less privacy, and higher taxes. | | |
| ▲ | CamperBob2 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | I live in central TX and until recently it has been fairly rural. It is now very suburban and it is very common to have to drive 20 miles or so for groceries. That makes no sense. How far did you have to drive for groceries before your area became "very suburban?" If you have to drive 20 miles for groceries, then you're not in the suburbs, you're still very rural. In any case, if you don't like it in the suburbs, move. I'm sure there's at least one other family in the city who'd love to swap places with you. At least they would if they weren't required, likely unnecessarily, to commute to work every weekday. |
| |
| ▲ | ungreased0675 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | This seems so obvious to me, but maybe it’s not… sometimes I want to go somewhere that’s far away. Last weekend I went to a restaurant that was 90 minutes and two states away. Should I not be allowed to do that? If I want organic oranges, and my local grocery store doesn’t have any, should I just make do? Most people don’t live in NYC. Transit and urban planning solutions appropriate for there is supremely unhelpful for most other places. | | |
| |
| ▲ | vrganj 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | (E)-Bikes. | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | xnx 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > I’d love to see people running on banning red light/license plate cameras Not me. We've become way too soft on vehicle crime which is often tied to other crimes. I'd love to see a lot more automated enforcement: speeding, red light running, shoulder riding, missing or fake tags, noise violations, car emissions, etc. |
| |
