| ▲ | pton_xd a day ago |
| "Last May, EFF reported that a sheriff’s office in Texas searched data from more than 83,000 automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras to track down a woman suspected of self-managing an abortion." These people really have nothing better to do? |
|
| ▲ | monksy a day ago | parent | next [-] |
| I've got distant family members in law enforcement. They brag about the reach of their equipment to surveil. Yes, they enjoy being overly suspicious. |
| |
| ▲ | estearum a day ago | parent [-] | | Suspicious? The word is abusive. Of the law, of their uniform, of their fellow citizens. |
|
|
| ▲ | jkahrs595 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They literally think they are doing the work of some divine creator. They have plenty of time to ruin the lives of other people because they think it saves their own. |
| |
| ▲ | estearum 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | Really insightful comment. Couldn't agree more. And many of these people really do need their Good Works on the force to do the saving, because God knows what they do to their wives and kids back home. |
|
|
| ▲ | cucumber3732842 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| >These people really have nothing better to do? Making examples out of some number of unlucky peasants over otherwise trivial deviance that harms nearly nobody is one of the key jobs of men at arms. Now, they may spend more time on "real crime" or collecting taxes by other names, but make no mistake this sort of stuff is stuff they (as an agency) must do if they are to properly serve the interests of their master. |
|
| ▲ | paytonjjones a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > from more than 83,000 automated license plate reader This feels purposefully misleading. Did they manually watch hours and hours of footage, or is this the equivalent of "I searched an online corpus of hundreds of millions of documents" (I Googled it) |
| |
| ▲ | cosmicgadget a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Doesn't feel misleading at all, "searched data from" is pretty much your "I Googled it" without branding. The inclusion of 83,000 seems more intended to quantify the scope of the surveillance accessible to these sheriffs. | | | |
| ▲ | morkalork a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Sure, call it that. They Googled it on their comperensive, nation-wide, unlimited access, fully indexed and integrated surveillance network (with 83,000 edge nodes) | |
| ▲ | a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [deleted] |
|
|
| ▲ | leereeves a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| [flagged] |
| |
| ▲ | MrDrMcCoy a day ago | parent | next [-] | | As someone that does, I disagree. Laws on this subject should exclusively apply to providers, with exceptions for medical necessity. There are too many harms that come from targeting individuals to be worthwhile. | | |
| ▲ | tadfisher a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Problem with that is that gathering evidence invariably leads to tracking down the recipient of the provider's service. | | | |
| ▲ | gershy a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Some would argue there are too many harms that occur if antiabortion measures aren't taken :( | | |
| ▲ | TripolitianFish a day ago | parent [-] | | Either argue the point or stop talking. This is a very hard position to take seriously, twee frowny face and all, if you’re willing to sell down the river the privacy of a largely vulnerable population because some sanctimonious humanism. :( | | |
| ▲ | gershy 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I am not an antiabortion crusader. I'm offering what I understand to be the antiabortion position here. By ":(" I wanted to imply "Unfortunately there are seemingly lots of people who seem to hold this view genuinely and very strongly", which was not my greatest moment of clear communication. | |
| ▲ | MrDrMcCoy a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | Indeed. If bringing justice to the guilty requires punishing the innocent, what's even the point? |
|
| |
| ▲ | datadrivenangel a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | this case was a self administrated abortion? | | |
| ▲ | MrDrMcCoy a day ago | parent [-] | | The trail of injustice required to bring justice to such a case does not result in a balanced scale. |
|
| |
| ▲ | watwut a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | It is more like, to men who enjoy destroying women and weaker people, this feels good. It is about them feeling good. | |
| ▲ | michaelmrose a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | The only reasons to entertain that perspective is their personal delusions which they ought not impose on others also when an act takes place in one jurisdiction wherein all actors are within that jurisdiction it is obviously nonsense to apply a different justifications laws to the act based on their residence. |
|
|
| ▲ | godwinson__4-8 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| There is no rest for the wicked. |
|
| ▲ | nine_k a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They have a law to enforce.
The law enforcement activity is as good as the law :( |
| |
| ▲ | BigTTYGothGF a day ago | parent | next [-] | | Every minute spent tracking down a lady getting an abortion is a minute not spent tracking down a murderer or a rapist or similar. | | |
| ▲ | andsoitis a day ago | parent | next [-] | | > getting an abortion is a minute not spent tracking down a murderer but see, there are people who believe abortion is murder, and perhaps one of the worst forms of murder because of its victim’s extreme innocence since it has not caused any harm in this world. | | |
| ▲ | pessimizer a day ago | parent | next [-] | | [flagged] | |
| ▲ | adrian_b a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | nailer 16 hours ago | parent [-] | | > I would accept that such people are entitled to their beliefs only if they would equally believe in the extreme innocence of a chicken who has not caused any harm in this world and they would seek to punish the murderer of the chicken. Why is equating human and chicken life necessary for you to accept that people are entitled to their beliefs? > A finger is not able to live independently, but the same is true for an embryo. The finger is the person's DNA. The child is not their DNA. In a 2025 University of Iowa single-center study (published in JAMA Network Open), out of 22 infants born alive at 21 weeks gestation, resuscitation was attempted in 17. 6 survived to NICU discharge (about 35%), and 1 remained hospitalized. |
|
| |
| ▲ | ai_critic a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | (amazing username.) You assume that a lady getting an abortion is not committing murder--these folks clearly think she is. (We don't need to argue about whether it is in fact murder, or whether if it is that the murder is justified or not--just understand that there are people that believe differently, and apparently they're willing to expend police resources on it.) | | |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett a day ago | parent [-] | | > We don't need to argue about whether it is in fact murder That's exactly the problem: we do. Not here, specifically, but if someone's false beliefs have grown to the point that they are hurting others over them, they need to be stopped. | | |
| ▲ | Joker_vD a day ago | parent [-] | | Do you not realize that this argument applies equally well both against pro-choice and against pro-lifers? It does, therefore it is entirely invalid and irrelevant. Yes, those people with "false beliefs". Ah, if only we could force everyone to have true beliefs. And it's not against freedom of thought and consciousness, oh no! We're only against actually false beliefs. That, you know, have been proven wrong. Or at least for which the proofs of incorrectness exist that we believe are correct. But since our beliefs true, this is fine. | | |
| ▲ | lern_too_spel 19 hours ago | parent [-] | | He said nothing about forcing. Suppose the false belief he was talking about was Creationism. Does his comment read as authoritarian? | | |
| ▲ | Joker_vD 17 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yes, it does. | | |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | It's fascinating that you are attempting to portray a comment as authoritarian that is arguing people should not enforce their false beliefs on others and should not restrict their bodily autonomy. It's literally an argument against being authoritarian. | | |
| ▲ | bit-anarchist 10 hours ago | parent [-] | | What I understood their point to be is that the only reason they are "false beliefs" is your own biases. If they aren't actual "false beliefs", then the restrictions on bodily autonomy are as justified as when dealing with killings, and your argument degenerates into pro-authoritarism. |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | nine_k a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | As I said, the law is the problem. Since the law demands to track and investigate ladies suspected of destruction of embryos inside their own bodies, the police's direct job is to do just that, even to the detriment of other activities. The police themselves may consider it stupid and counterproductive, but their opinion does not count until the next elections. | | |
| ▲ | Joker_vD a day ago | parent [-] | | The universality of "I want the rule of law!.. unless I dislike the laws, of course" stance is truly depressing. I swear, were it not for rather strict ground-level prohibitions in the constitutions, we'd all went back to allegedly enlightened monarchies ages ago. Perhaps we yet all will, things really are looking quite peculiar around the world right now. |
| |
| ▲ | cindyllm a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | kyle_martin1 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | [dead] | |
| ▲ | ButlerianJihad a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | [flagged] | | |
| ▲ | estearum a day ago | parent [-] | | Wait you think there are so many exceptions for rape and incest because of the political power of the rape and incest lobby? Holy fuck. Even for someone who has quickly earned a name for himself and his insane takes, this is a strong entry. Bravo, ButlerianJihad! | | |
| ▲ | ButlerianJihad a day ago | parent [-] | | Think of it this way: Incest is not always consensual, and incest may be intra-family molestation or sexual abuse. In those cases, certainly the "rape exceptions" cover mothers who seek to abort their unborn children. However, incest is not always non-consensual, such as between ordinary adults who just cross a "bright line boundary" and have a sexual affair that they may or may not regret. So is this why there are so many exceptions for "non-rape incest" abortions? Why, to avoid being exposed to shame or having, for example, siblings need to co-parent their rather illicit offspring that nobody will talk about? What's unique about "non-rape incest" that it requires its own carved-out exception that is so often baked into all the laws prohibiting other kinds of abortions? | | |
| ▲ | estearum 18 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are incorrect. The logic behind a separate incest exception is that the vast majority of incest is at least coercive/groomed if not forcible rape, but qualifying for the rape exception would require meeting the significant and probably-not-achievable standard of proving rape months after it happened. And in many incest cases that means specifically "proving rape" after years and years "intimate relations," given again that most incest cases are coerced/groomed for years or decades. Contrast with the simple prenatal paternity test. |
|
|
|
| |
| ▲ | 8note a day ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | within the US context, the government isnt allowed to just have any law it wants, and it isnt allowed yo enforce laws that breach individual rights | |
| ▲ | JoshTriplett a day ago | parent | prev [-] | | "I was just enforcing the law" is no better than "I was just following orders". | | |
|
|
| ▲ | dodger-dog a day ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Seems like sheriff was searching for missing person. Was concern about her welfare and mental health, thus the use of the cameras. You can buy Mifepristone at CVS, Target, Walgreen's and the like. I don't think they were trying to track which CVS she was going to. The article is misleading, but that should never get in the way of righteous rage that helps a person form identity and purpose in an otherwise existential and empty vacuum of meaning. |
| |
