Are they elected?

Some are. Usually on a campaign of "law and order", which makes Flock cameras an easy sell to their voting base. Because they let you keep an eye on the sort of people who are likely to be criminals. You know. Those people.

They themselves generally don't mind the invasion of privacy, at least not until it catches them specifically. In general they are much, much more afraid of the "crime wave" than of the police. (A crime wave which never seems to diminish, despite more and more policing and punishment. And which is contradicted by crime statistics.)

▲

whimsicalism a day ago | parent | next [-]

The absence of cameras necessitates much more a reliance on "those people" profiling style policing than their presence.

Do people feel the same way about speeding cameras?

I find the backlash against ALPRs wildly disproportionate. It earnestly saddens me that our political focus has flowed to these issues, datacenters, college sports rules, etc. while we remain incapable of confronting far more consequential structural problems, like an inability to tax and redistribute wealth.

▲

doctorwho42 a day ago | parent | next [-]

I feel the same way about speeding cameras. As I found they impede the flow of traffic.

Ultimately this is due to the fact that the systems are used to generate revenue from citizens trying to live from day to day. Speed cameras don't really impact the wealthy the way they do the working class. Same goes for video surveillance.

So why should we the people give up our right to privacy for some fake sense of safety and huge bill

▲

whimsicalism 8 hours ago | parent [-]

I would rather revenue raised from speeders and dangerous activities than from my income. I don't think the evidence is very strong that cameras impede the flow of traffic.

▲

doctorwho42 7 hours ago | parent [-]

So you are saying you do not regularly go over the posted speed limits anywhere? Even by accident when you are not fully paying attention to your gauge?

And it's not a question of one or the other. It's a imposition of both upon the citizenry.

	▲	whimsicalism 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I'm saying that I lived in a city with speed cameras for years and never got a ticket whereas I saw plenty of dangerous drivers get camera ticketed. To the extent to which we expect people to violate speed limits in the normal course of safe driving, the limits should be raised. Speed cameras typically give you leeway over the limit. And yes, I support interventions that measurable reduced serious injury and death while still allowing you to drive to your destination.

▲

rdiddly a day ago | parent | prev [-]

If it makes you feel any better, data centers and Flock cameras ARE manifestations of the wealth imbalance.

▲

Libcat99 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The law and order people are nuts. On a local thread complaining about our township budget it was pointed out that we spend 45% of tax revenue on policing and that if we want real cuts, some has to come from there.

And a repeated response from a certain kind of person was "Well, if we're spending 45% on policing, we must need it right..."

	▲	antonvs 14 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It's like my tiger-repelling rock. I haven't seen a tiger in our suburban neighborhood ever since I got it.

▲

throwaway27448 a day ago | parent | prev [-]

The police and flock cameras are there regardless of how people vote lol. Who would bother to pitch flock cameras to people and why?

▲

Loughla a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Depends on the type of police. Sheriff's are, I know. But I'm pretty sure city chiefs and state chiefs are just appointed by other elected officials. So I guess one step removed?

▲

thephyber a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Generally the county Sheriff is elected, but the city police chief is usually appointed by civilian government.

▲

andsoitis a day ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]