Let’s begin with the word itself. Because it conveys what they see us as. A flock – as of sheep or other animals to be herded. It is said of psychopaths that they have a need to tell us what they really think (and intend) so that when they do it, they can say they told us so – and we were too dumb to listen to them. Thus, we deserved what we got.
Garret Langley, the CEO of Flock Safety – the private company that is erecting cameras in public spaces (see here to see whether Flock is watching you) and “sharing” the “data” with the government – has called people who oppose being treated like herd animals “terrorists” for publishing the location of these cameras, so that people are aware they’re being watched. It’s another iteration of the cop crying Stop Resisting! as he pummels his victim into a bloody mess.
Some people are taking defensive action against these cameras. The italics are there to emphasize a key point. Ordinarily, it is wrong to damage private property and those who do so deserve to be held accountable. This is not the same as that. If Flock were selling its cameras to be used on private property, they’d be within their rights and it would be wrong to take action – for exactly the same reason it’d be wrong to take down your neighbor’s private security cameras. They are not only his private property. They are on his private property. These Flock cameras are not like that. They are being erected on public property – the “commons,” to use the old term – and then used against us, by the government (and also by private companies; the insurance mafia, for instance).
This treads across an important line.
Neither Flock nor any other private company has the right to erect cameras on public property because – for one thing – private companies do not own public property, the open spaces all around us. The situation can be seen – ought to be seen – as waking up one morning to discover your neighbor has erected a camera on your property and is watching you. You’d have every right, in that case, to fire up the Sawzall and cut down the son-of-a-bitch and throw it in a dumpster. If your neighbor called you a “terrorist” for doing it, everyone (hopefully) would laugh at his deranged, cognitively dissonant hysterics. So why the hysterics over private citizens doing the same to cameras being erected on their property – public property, the “commons” – by Flock?
A man in Virginia has been caught doing exactly that and he is being persecuted (the right word) as a “criminal” for doing it. Jeffrey Sovern got caught acting defensively toward more than a dozen of these private cameras erected in public. He argues that these cameras are “unconstitutional,” which may be so – in that an argument can be made that they violate the 4th Amendment as well as other parts of the Bill of Rights – but his argument does not fixate on the proper argument.
Private companies have no standing to monitor the public in public areas. Nor does the government, arguably – because such monitoring is premised on the idea that the public must be monitored, which is another way saying the public (that’s you and me and everyone else) is presumptively criminal. Monitoring people used to be restricted to criminals; i.e., people in jail or prison who’d been convicted of a crime serious enough to warrant not just confinement but also constant watching. Criminals have established that they need to be watched. They have forfeited their right to privacy is another way to put it. People who’ve not been convicted of anything or even suspected of having done something have a right to not be monitored – in public areas, at least.
It is both understandable and legitimate for a privately owned store to have security cameras because there are shoplifters but – this is the important part – it’s a private space and if you don’t want to be on camera, you do not have to go into the store.
People have no choice about going out in public – unless they wish to live in a prison of their own and never leave their house or apartment. In other words, these private companies are imposing on our space and our right to not be recorded by private companies, our comings and goings monetized and used against us for other, more sordid purposes (e.g., the comings and goings of women cops are interested in being “shared” with the cops).
So, tally ho!
There is nothing to feel ashamed for in acting in self-defense. In fact, it is the right and honorable thing to do. We will not comply our way out of this. If we continue comply, we will only get more – and worse. A message has got to be sent that there are limits to what can be done in public areas by private companies, especially when these private companies act in cahoots with the government.
Flock Them and the horse they rode in on.
. . .
If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos.
We depend on you to keep the wheels turning!
Our donate button is here.
If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:
EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079
PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $25 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)
If you’d like a Baaaaa hat or other EPautos gear, see here!
It is rather heartwarming seeing videos of FLOK cameras being cut down across American….
ofcourse one should NOT do that ! It is for all of our safety by those above who want nothing but the best of all of us!
How about obscuring or modifying your license plates?
Although technically illegal, a fresnel lens can thwart off-axis surveillance or adding serifs, modifying the letters and numbers utilizing easily available electrical tape might just do the trick.
For cell phones, a faraday shield bag is an option or just use a burner phone (soon to be outlawed–get yours now).
I’m all for ideas on low tech methods used to thwart these surveillance systems.
The flock cameras that seem to be EVERYWHERE now are just part of the MASSIVE surveillance state that has been erected over the past 25 years or so under numerous presidential administrations, BOTH Republican AND Democrat. As has been mentioned by people elsewhere, whenever government proposes MORE surveillance, it’s ALWAYS framed as NECESSARY for “Saaaaaaaaaaaaafety”, “Protecting Public Health” (e.g. COVID era VACCINE PASSPORTS), “Stopping crime”, “Stopping terrorism”, etc., and people fall for it every time.
https://www.technocracy.news/flock-builds-the-digital-police-state-while-americans-attend-the-political-circus/
https://www.pressenterprise.com/2026/07/13/lapd-ends-agreement-with-flock-cameras-citing-privacy-data-concerns/
This so called ‘they have to us’ rule if it exists is nothing more than self serving nonsense because of how those who recognize and oppose what they are doing are treated. Also 90+% of people could be in opposition and it will get rammed through because they bought off enough people in government.
What difference does it make if they ‘tell us’ when nothing short of mass violent opposition will stop it or people who know better have no way of opting out?
If these psychos had any ability to feel guilt I would say it’s just a psychological defense mechanism. But they don’t feel guilt so what’s the point?
I agree, Brent –
There comes a time when someone – a brave few someones – has to be first to advance and walk point. I’m no longer a young man but I am willing to do that. My hope is that others will decide to defend themselves, their families and their futures, too.
Willing to do what? If there’s something you can do why aren’t you already doing it?
I’m not calling you out, not meant to be some sort of macho challenge.
I’m curious what you think can or needs to be done and how to achieve it. It’s like we’re all waiting around for someone else to solve our problems.
Ultimately you and ONLY you are responsible for your situation.
Is the world fucked? Most definitely. I do wish things were different. I’m only given one go ’round on this rock, I’m sure as Hell not wasting it worrying about what Yertle The Turtle does far off in Oz on the Potomac. Doing my best to succeed in the reality that is and try to pass good values and as much as I can to my kids.
Well said. Like you, I am not talking smack, I want ideas of what can be done to make things better. That’s the reason I’m here.
The private/public property distinction is immaterial. An act is either aggression or it is not. There is no such thing as public property, any more than there is such a thing as a “public accommodation.” Both just imaginary constructs of control. “Public” property is just private property controlled by members of a special club. And, worse, property that the vast majority of the populace consider necessary to fund.
Monkey wrenching might be satisfying, but it won’t work. We are just at that point of the arms race where running a saws-all has the upper hand. Somehow we have to change minds. And, like it or not, that has to come from funding our own indoctrination camps that outcompete the government indoctrination camps.
And, like it or not, by increasing the IQ of the voter, which means closed borders are just a start.
Libertarians maybe don’t distinguish on your point about public property just being private controlled by a special group.
In a world of all explicit private property the owner would still get to set the terms of use and on the ground things would look similar. Maybe better, maybe worse. The alternative is true public ownership, democracy, which is mob rule and would end up in chaos and a bunch of Karens anyway.
With “public” stuff you at least have a political wedge to lever yourself into the discussion even if you’re on the lowest rung of the social ladder. Before the American experiment you were born a peasant, you lived and died as a peasant. You had no voice in concept at all.
The target can’t be all or nothing perfection, but pushing the needle towards better. That’s why you have to make the best of things and be content with you can achieve now. If you hold out for the Utopia before you’re happy you’ll only die disappointed and bitter.
Garrett Langley’s smug face along with the rest of his severed headneeds to adorn one of the posts after one of these cameras has been sawed off of it.
I was thinking the same, MQ –
He looks like a little twerp; probably the type who grew up with helicopter parents and all strapped in for “safety.” That word has become an incitement for me. When I hear it, I want to smash something.
Why separate his head from his body? Vlad personified great ideas about deterrence.
Surprised that I have not seen DEET mentioned in the overall de-flocking discussion. It would turn the plastic housing into melty goo. DEET. It’s a parasite repellant.
DEET based insecticides are useful for clouded plastic headlight lenses. One swipe with a DEET soaked cloth removes ALL of the cloudiness and yellowing of plastic headlight lenses. without polishing or buffing. The effect is amazing, to say the least.
It is important to wipe off the DEET as soon as the desired effect is achieved. A water-soaked rag is enough to remove the DEET. Adding a protectant after the fact is a good idea.
The whole world a Gaza, a fuckin concentration camp, that is what these heebs are doing. Print the $, make the rules for the Goyim cattle. Inject them with poison, send them off to war, chemtrail em like bugs, charge em % and laugh about it in the satanic temple, where they fuck your kids. Wake up.
There’s no telling what I’ll do when I’m all flocked up. I’m liable to get flocking crazy.
Medford Oregon has installed speed trap cameras, and stealthily put up a very small 20 mph sign to entrap drivers who assume the speed in 35, this mind you on the main north south highway 99 (which runs parallel to I-5).
The fines are huge. One reason is the private corporation which makes and installs these awful things takes their cut. The City of Medford, run by statist fascist pigs loves them, they rake in the money, no cop has to stop or ticket you, they just collect the fine.
It is literally highway robbery – a serious felony crime. Yet when the state does it, it somehow becomes ok. And no, the public did not vote to approve of these damn things.
I happen to drive by the Medford Court House on a regular basis, what I see in the parking lots are big brand new cars, lots of them, hundreds of them. It is obvious to me, a person who drives a 20 year old car, the courts are running a money racket. The government PIGS have lots of money to pay the outrageous sticker prices of modern cars.
“speed trap cameras in Medford have faced legal challenges, but courts have generally upheld their use, stating that they do not violate constitutional rights. However, some argue that the timing of yellow lights may be manipulated to increase violations, which raises concerns about fairness.”
I have personally witnessed several times how the green light suddenly turns yellow while you approach it, but not on the normal schedule. It appears the traffic light is trying to entrap you into speeding to make it through the yellow light. I wonder if they are controlling the light changes with Ai technology.
We live in strange evil times, the courts are far the most intrusive in the criminal system of state. They need money, more and more money, because of their ever rising costs from inflation, wages, pensions, and gas and electricity costs. The courts and jails are huge concrete grotesque gulags. GULAGS like in Gulag Archipeligo.
The state, via cops and courts, can force you to play their damn evil statist games and become part of their kill machine. For instance, the cops can arrest you for not being called for a jury summons or the military draft. Both are damn evil forms of coercion. Ukraine is a fine example of how millions of young white Christian youth were literally sent to the front line in the past 4 years to die in only two weeks of combat.
2 million Ukes have died so far – just so the USA can wage a proxy war on Russia using Ukraine like toilet paper.
The US War on Iran Continues & Why It Was Never Going to Stop
The New Atlas
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8mjMxswV3KE
Flock cameras are the last straw. They need to be torn down, those defending them treated as enemies of the people.
Mark Passio – Order Followers
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMMEC4BYdos
If an individual is following orders, that individual CAN NOT be exercising Conscience, since, by definition, exercising Conscience means that one is willfully choosing for themselves Right Action over Wrong Action.
“I was just following orders” is NEVER a valid excuse or “justification” for immoral, criminal behavior, and this lame attempt to abdicate personal responsibility SHOULD NEVER BE ACCEPTED as a valid excuse for such behavior.
The term Justification comes from the Latin noun jus: “right; law” and the Latin verb facere: “to make; to create”.
Justification = To “Create” A Right.
“You assist an evil system most effectively by obeying its orders and decrees. An evil system never deserves such allegiance. Allegiance to it means partaking of the evil. A good person will resist an evil system with his or her soul.” – Mahatma Gandhi
This is an excerpt from Mark Passio’s phenomenal lecture entitled: “Natural Law – The REAL Law Of Attraction And How To Apply It In Your Life.”
DeFlock is mapping the cameras.
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/02/anti-surveillance-mapmaker-refuses-flock-safetys-cease-and-desist-demand
What you do with that information is entirely up to you, but bear in mind that these things aren’t just cameras – they fingerprint and log cellphones, too. The battery apparently has a 12 hour charge life, fyi.
Hi AC,
I’ve contacted deflock and am hoping to work with them directly; stay tuned.
Hi Eric,
Flock bought a drone manufacturer, I think in 2024 or early 2025.
Well, things just got worse:
https://www.gadgetreview.com/meet-flocks-alpha-drone-it-reads-license-plates-from-2000-feet
I see Sovern’s gofundme is over $39,000. https://www.gofundme.com/f/jeff-sovern-legal-fund
I believe it was Frederic Douglas that pointed out (paraphrased) “however much tyranny you will tolerate is exactly how much you will get”
“your neighbor has erected a camera on your property and is watching you.”
What about when the neighbor moves that camera back a few feet, across the property line, and onto his own property? Is it okay then?
You’re asking essentially the same question(s) I was going to pose.
Take those Ring cameras for example. They’re mounted on someone’s home but pointing to the street. That’s not really what bothers me. I have some closed circuit cameras on my property.
I don’t even mind them recording public traffic passing by and recording it. I do this also, running about 30 days worth of recordings and it’s helped with issues a couple of times. One was figuring out who was stealing my tomatoes and killing chickens. Little masked trash panda fuckers. Another was getting the license plates from a jerk who wrecked into my neighbor’s fence and ran. In the second case I had to physically download the MP4s and give them to the detective, so closed loop accountability in terms of data controlled by me and everyone knew the chain of custody from my camera to civil court evidence. Maybe it’s now uploaded into the fusion center cloud, in fact probably is. But the asshole who caused the damage and didn’t accept it caused that to happen.
What bothers me with Ring is they run facial recognition and the data is uploaded to Ring (Amazon) servers where the owner agrees to use and data analysis. It’s this bulk collection of me just walking my dog, logging metadata, times, patterns, no accountability of who has access and why that really bothers me. I wish there were no spying cameras but I’m not going to tie my own hands and not use them. I also have dashboard and body cameras to record interactions. If I ever have them with cops I want my own version in case theirs “malfunction” magically.
I asked my neighbors to turn them off and that went over like a lead balloon.
What is does the libertarian intelligentsia believe are my rights and recourse?
Hi Anon,
This is where my family and I do not see eye to eye. I despise cameras…all of them. If people wish to have cameras surrounding their property I believe they have that right. When one’s Ring doorbell starts video recording their neighbors coming and going from their own home, walking around the block, etc. is an invasion of privacy, in my view.
Where I draw the line is this mandate that if one is in public that they should not have a right to privacy. Every individual should have a right to privacy and not having their space invaded by some machine or individual who believe it is their right to record them. If one is sitting at a restaurant enjoying a meal why are they the bad guy when they do not want to be in some influencers TikTok production? Why does government believe they have the right to record or comings and goings as we drive down the highway? Why is it allowable for cellphones and TVs to watch us through tiny covert lenses? Why can new cars spy on us and then have the audacity to sell this information to insurance companies and three letter agencies?
I am sick of the constant wailing of “it’s for safety.” It is never about safety, but control. If we wanted safety we would all be walking around with a 9mm pistol and a 100 lb Rottweiler.
Safety is not secretly recording someone without their knowledge or permission.
So how do you resolve this? You don’t have a reasonably expectation of privacy in public nor do you have a libertarian right to tell anyone else what they can or can’t do in public.
It seems to always return to the circular libertarian logic where you have to either tolerate others or you have to tell them what to do, which is antithetical to liberty, is it not? You have the right to ask them not to film you but what is your recourse if they say no?
That’s the sublime genius is what the Founder proposed. Live and let live but only voluntarily. Meaning, we don’t expect feudal Europe to change and if you like that, stay and enjoy. If you want liberty, then give us a try. We only ask that you don’t lie, steal or cheat and we TRUST you to do that.
It’s the voluntary nature of the Declaration and Articles of Confederation, individuals in theory coexisting with mutual respect. The ink wasn’t even dry before it was subverted. Whether that was organized by some mythical secret society or simply greedy, opportunistic jerks I don’t think matters.
But, why don’t we have a right to privacy in public? Who made that law? Why does my right get trampled so someone else can make a YouTube video? Whatever happened to asking permission before using someone’s likeness or before putting them on video? Is common courtesy dead?
A few weeks ago I was in the grocery store and a few high school girls were taking a survey. The girls came up to me and asked if I would be interested in answering a few questions. I said I would be happy to. They asked if I minded being on video. I said I do not wish to be. They thanked me for my time and went off to find someone else. Simple exchange. They asked. I said no. We moved on.
Personally, I would appreciate it if establishments would post that they are recording. In the old days such signs existed “This area is under 24 hour video surveillance.” Individuals then have a choice whether to enter the premise or not.
There is absolutely no reason why signs cannot or should not be posted.
Sneakiness is creepiness.
I found the US Supreme Court case regarding no privacy in public: The foundational US Supreme Court case regarding privacy in public is Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967). In this landmark ruling, Justice Potter Stewart famously established that the Fourth Amendment “protects people, not places”. While it defined locations where a person has a “reasonable expectation of privacy”, the Court also explicitly noted that “what a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection”. Therefore, actions and conversations readily observable in public spaces generally carry no expectation of privacy. Personally, I think the ruling is BS. If that is the case, erect a flock camera outside all congress members and US Supreme Court members homes and see how they like it. Include their offices, too.
Hi Shadow,
The 1967 ruling actually strengthened the right to privacy and overturned the 1928 law that made it legal for the government to spy on Katz.
The problem today is the government is using a loophole to decimate an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights…the Third Party. Since private enterprise is not subject to the Constitution they can record, sell, and spy to their heart’s content. By buying the data the government can deny the intrusion of privacy and an individual’s Constitutional rights.
Yeah, leave it to the Feds to find a loophole. It is akin to having the British spy on us for our government, and we spy on the British citizen for their own government. Plausible deniability for all those involved.
How do you define privacy? You go out in public you can’t expect people to not look at you and observe your actions.
Or do you have some right to tell people not to see you or being required to look away? Do you have some right against them forming a conclusion or opinion? I look around me all the time trying to judge people, assess attraction, threat, determine intent.
The right to your likeness is a commercial aspect not editorial. The news doesn’t need your permission to record you since they are simply documenting what happened. It’s not a black/white because the news sells ads so it’s not like it’s a pure profit-vs-information question but maybe you get my point. Do you expect to stop a reporter from observing and reporting? Creepy as it may be why can’t a person stand on the street and record you? We expect to be able to do that to others, like recording cops.
If you don’t want what you keep personal to become public you need to stay out of the public or take steps to shield yourself. It’s not the responsibility of everyone else to look away and to avoid interaction. Are we never to have unspoken thoughts? You put curtains on your windows if you don’t want to be looked at. Or you move to a place where your home is a great distance from a public/non-private common area.
That’s the signal that you don’t want your private life to be looked at. In public isn’t the equivalent of this tinting your windows and wearing sunglasses? You take the responsibility, not expect society to bend to your desires.
You certainly have a right to not to be assaulted or impeded. The essential aspect isn’t the being seen part it’s the being left alone and only having voluntary interactions.
I’m being rhetorical here because I don’t think it’s a simple discussion as to exactly where private stops and the common area starts. All libertarian principle hinges on the interactions in the common areas conceptually. It starts with how are air, water and land shared? Who gets to write the “common sense” expectations? The only workable solution is voluntary interactions, e.g. the right to associate meaning also the right to disassociate with those you disagree. You join others in a community where all expect the same thing but even in this unicorn and rainbow world you’ll have some friction to deal with eventually, which means you have to compromise and tolerate something sometime.
You are missing one important point. Yes, there is less of an expectation of privacy when in public, but the main objection of flock cameras and other devices is the ability of being tracked completely in one’s travels, from point A to point B and beyond.
When a person’s movements can be completely tracked along with one’s mannerisms, that is most certainly above and beyond the lessened expectation pf privacy.
Well argued. I’d go even further. I don’t think for-profit should have any impact on the principle. That’s just commie-talk.
I also think this “right to privacy in public” is nonsense. Particularly things like the Flocks and even the searchable database. The “right” was created specifically for Griswold, the supposed right of one to buy birth control without anyone else knowing.
The trick is going to be just figuring out how to make the system non-profitable. Then Flock will dry up and go away.
Steve,
Being seen (and even recorded) by individuals is one thing. A panopticon run by “public private” entities is another. Flock (and Ring) do not have the right to record and monetize my comings and goings. Nor to “share” the data they collect with the government or the insurance mafia or anyone else. Of course, that begs the question about the government and the insurance mafia… if these entities had no power over us, Flock and Ring would just be busybody companies and that’d be all. But the reality is they’re a threat to whatever shreds of privacy we still have – and yes, we do have a right to privacy. One that perhaps is best enforced by a hard right to the jawbone. Or via a Sawzall.
I agree it has a creepy, stalker-esque feel to it, but it doesn’t do anything that could not be perfectly legally done by a constable with notepad and pencil, plus a huge army of clerks. I hate the implications, but this is not about warrantless searches, but merely about efficient means of establishing reasonable suspicion.
Seems to me a possible “compromise” would be abolishing the abomination of “qualified immunity”, and using the Constitution’s power to get rid of the current Article III courts There’s a reason the founders did not create A III courts, but rather gave Congress the power to set them up — no one could figure out how to keep lawyers from becoming corrupt.
You make a good point, Anon. But sadly, even the curtains or shades in my windows are not going to keep the spies out. Not when the Feds can map where you are at any time inside your home. We are past being able to even have privacy in our own homes, even IF we avoid the smart devices (and appliances). And, as Raider Girl said, we should be able to have privacy in our own front yard without Nosy Nancy across the street pointing a camera at my front yard because she has nothing else better to do. As for the public, documenting where one goes turns into something far more malicious, and it does not end well with us little people. On the other hand, it is a data mine treasure for those using said spy devices (Flock & the like).
Anon,
I not referring to observation or not interacting with people. A salesman has a right to sell and I have a right to say no.
Recording people is something entirely different. It is no longer an interaction, but a record that can be stored forever.
Where do you draw the line? If you are sitting on an airplane and the person sitting beside you has their phone on recording you. What do you? There is nowhere to go. How much invasion of our personal space in a public place is acceptable?
Hi RG,
It’s obnoxious for a private person to deliberately record other people out in public when they don’t wish to be recorded; it is something much worse when the recording is being done at scale and people’s movements and whereabouts are being stored and reported to other parties, such as the cops, insurance mafia, etc. Security cameras on private property that are merely there to protect the property are one thing. Cameras that transmit the data to be aggregated/monetized and very possibly used for creepy/authoritarian purposes is something else.
Hi Eric,
Here is my problem with all recordings and it is much deeper than just being obnoxious.
Can we agree that a video or picture on a phone is stored in a Cloud database? Who has access to this database? Your government. This is all entwined. It isn’t the NSA and FBI setting up these cameras (well, not directly). They aren’t building the surveillance centers either that house every photo, phone call, text, and video on your smartphone, but they can see it and use it against you.
Very much like COVID where a number of us knew that the nose swabs were nothing more than DNA samples sent to the CDC.
These phones (which some hold voluntarily) is a constant recording device. So every pic generated on them goes back to the very people who should be denied from accessing them.
100 percent. RG – I agree with everything you’ve written. I am not a luddite and I understand that technology is just a tool. But this is a tool that, I think, is too dangerous for us brachiating apes to handle. Consider today vs. 1996. It was such a better world then. This isn’t the nostalgia of an aging GenX dude. It is a reality. You were there, too – and I bet you remember.
Frank Herbert was right. Smash the machines.
Not only destroy the machines, but never allow them into operation.
Right now these Flock (Sheeple) cameras are recording license plates. If they can read plates they can read faces, make, models, and eventually, will be able to connect to the devices that are inside the vehicle (if they don’t do this already).
I remember 1996. We held up cigarette lighters at concerts instead of phones. We actually left the house to meet people. We could still pronounce all of the ingredients on the food labels. And I looked damn good in a Guess miniskirt.
I miss 1996.
Speaking of the COVID swabs, many claimed that the swabs themselves involuntarily vaccinated those whose were tested. In essence, getting a person one way or the other. Never mind using the PCR test that Mullis himself warned not to use to diagnose anything. Fraud all around there, and with the Flock too.
RG, a good share of the problem is not the act of recording itself, but the simple fact that the asses who do it have never been punched really hard in the face.
In any society, there will always arise people who need killin’. A civilization which punishes those who provide that service is on the way out.
Well, the 100 lb Rottweiler is a PITA and leaves dog exhaust to clean up everywhere, but if you substitute another 9mm or something better starting with .4 or .5, I’m in.
Si vis pacem parabellum.
Hi Ernie,
The pistol isn’t going to notify you if there is sudden movement outside, the 100 lb. Rottweiler is the best alarm you will ever need. Ask any UPS driver.
You are of course, correct, around the house.
I had thought you meant being out in public, where a 100 lb land shark is sometimes a liability.
Smaller, less obvious mutts work fine too.
In public, I agree with you, but with the 100 lb land shark you would have the sidewalk to yourself. 😁
Heh. I once made a cross country trip in a single cab pickup with a 140 lb Akita. He thought he was a lap dog. But nobody came near the pickup…
That’s a good one, Ernie!
Akitas are beautiful dogs. I’m getting close (psychologically) to being able to begin to consider getting another dog. Losing Pace was horrendous for me because he was young (only two years), so it wasn’t like it was with all my prior dogs, who lived to a ripe old age and died of natural causes. You know it’s coming a long time in advance and there’s peace in that and also on knowing he (or she) had a great life.
BTW, are any of these tax resolution places worth using? I got behind on filing 3 years ago when I was doing my typical 80 hour weeks and taking care of a wife with cancer, now disabled. The state is getting pissy now.
Hi Ernie,
I haven’t been impressed by what I have seen in my neck of the woods, but if you have a local one that is open all year round then I would probably set up an appointment to discuss your situation.
A local accountant should also be able to help and July is usually pretty slow for us so someone should be able to contact the state pretty quickly to stall them from “estimating taxes” or bank account liens.
I am sorry to hear about your wife. I hope she is doing better.
I have dealt with tax problems in connection with my practice sometimes bankruptcy can be a way to deal with them, ch 13 or 7. Get a hold of a local Bankruptcy attorney. see if there are options for you.
“Safety” is an illusion, or delusion in the first place. No one is getting out of this alive.
Since SCOTUS just decided geofencing requires a warrant, is mass video surveillance any different?
SCOTUS was very narrow. The government can’t do it. They didn’t consider whether private organizations could. And at least until we get another 4 KBJs on the court, I think that will stand. Once that happens, the government will be permitted to order the serfs around however they like.
Perhaps we all should make a practice of keeping a good cordless sawzall with a demolition blade on our person or in our car at all times.
Its a solid practice, and could easily be interpreted as resistance to a tyrannical state. It could also provide legal cover to patriots who are actively fighting these tyrants.
We can call ourselves the “Pole Bunyans?”
Hehe Good one!
I wonder how many city council members get caught on camera? I wonder if they use their privileged positions to make the recorded evidence go away?
I say we citizens set up our own networks, pointed at our “leader’s” homes, tracking their vehicles and broadcasting their face everywhere they go.
What’s good for the goose…
We all know what will happen. There will be lawsuits, investigations, LEO’s hassling anyone who would attempt such a thing. The enforcers will say the justification of a camera’s placement is that it is in a bad neighborhood. So what? Shouldn’t the equitable response be that the white people are even worse than the POC shoplifters?
Technically it’s the same thing, except for the fact that Flick has Official Permission (TM) to use public property to do it.
If you stick it on private property with permission it could work.
Also there is a well-established right to take photos, video, etc. in public, although there are also well-established limits. You can take a photo of the front of someone’s house from the sidewalk, for example, but you can’t use a high powered lens to peep into the more private areas (whether you are in public or not).
If you do this be prepared for a long & expensive court fight, because even if you are in fact correct I can guarantee they will try to weaponize this framework against you. This could be a good thing in the sense that it could establish binding precedent that clarifies limits…but that is also very very expensive.
Maybe a paintball gun or a can of spray paint rigged to a tree trimming pole to cover the lens would wotk, get you out of there faster so no safety cultists can spot you. Cutting down the whole damn thing does sene a better message though, Flock you!
“Silly String” or wasp spray can be used to obscure the lens of the flock cameras. Both can be sprayed fro0m a distance. A more permanent solution is a high-power laser that can permanently blind the image sensor contained within.
Be sure to wear identity-obscuring clothing, hats, glasses and other anti-recognition items.
There ARE solutions…
Not that I’d do it (cough cough) but a Gamo .22 air rifle has nearly the same ballistics as a .22 LR gun. One could probably smack a camera lens from a good distance without being noticed.
ZeroHedge had an article on “The Economics Of The Surveillance State” that also covers this.
https://www.zerohedge.com/technology/economics-surveillance-state
Even though Flock cameras violate the Constitution does anyone think a GovCo appointed judge will order them removed?
I live in Commiefornia, but once Flock’s data sharing with the Feds came to light, my city turned them all off, and they’re being removed.
Nearly every town council and county government meeting offers an opportunity for citizens to speak.
Several months ago, a citizen used his 3-minute speech to denounce Flock in calm, measured tones. He pointed out that Flagstaff and Sedona have booted Flock out. He expressed hope that the town’s grant-funded, first year free trial of Flock will be cancelled, before citizens actually have to pay tens of thousands a year to renew it.
Flock out:
https://www.fightforthefuture.org/actions/flockout/
Sure they do. The majority of citizens have to work at the times of these city council and county government “public” meetings.
What a scam.
“a citizen used his 3-minute speech to denounce Flock in calm, measured tones”
Beg your captors for more freedom, but only during your allotted time, and don’t get too uppity, slave.
My brother got a ticket based on “evidence” from a camera system. He was rightfully furious. I applaud those who have the stones to tear the gd things down.
Jeffrey “Sovern”? Hehehe…
“A vigilante group called ‘The Blade Runners’ continue to cut down ULEZ Cameras – a traffic surveillance system that charges people for not driving the correct ‘Green’ Car.”
There are numerous videos on Twitter showing the downings. Usually the blade runners take a saw and cut down the pole that the ULEZ is attached to. Within hours, the state is back to repairing it.
With the number of actions being taken across the country to destroy these vile things, this may be the tipping point. No Tea Party this time, acts to disrupt and destroy the panopticon being erected in our midst may finally take down this rapacious government and its civilian traitors.
Sovern is a hero as far as I am concerned. As you said, “Flock ‘Em”. Bite this snake’s head off now before it grows and multiplies.