And arrested?

I doubt you are pro-Flock, perhaps you don't like civil disobedience?

Many of us on this thread have experience with city councils and are anti-Flock and pro-civil disobedience. We're arguing with you from a point of praticality related to city business meetings. Practicing civil disobedience at a city council meeting is fraught with peril- for example, you're preventing other people from having their topics discussed/voted on. From my perspective, if your goal is to make actual change, getting arrested at a city council meeting speaking on the wrong topic is not a particularly effective method.

	▲	techjamie 24 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I disagree with your assessment. These city councils undoubtedly are aware that Flock/ALPRs are a controversial issue, and in many cases, including this one, they don't allow people to speak on the topic. I recall watching a meeting, I think it was in Austin? Where on every topic, most people coming up to talk did so because they refused to hear comments on the cameras. Instead, they had to deal with the frustration of constantly sending people off the podium. The lesson being, if you know people will feel strongly, it should behoove you to schedule time for them to speak properly.

▲

Manuel_D an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

The point of civil disobedience is to be arrested. That's the goal of civil disobedience.