If you build a curb for someone that is well-known for curb stomping people to death and has a bunch of people behind them saying how great curb stomping is, that's on you.
Maybe! But maybe that area still really does need a curb, and it's the curb-stomping people we need to worry about more than the curb?
The sharing of the database in clear contravention of the law is a symptom of the widespread police culture of immunity from civil oversight in the United States. They do it because they get away with it.
I in no way meant to imply the curb-stompers were in the right, only that building a curb for them when you know very well what it'll be used for makes you culpable as well.
Flock didn’t build a sidewalk. Flock built the stomp-o-tron 9000 with convenient victim loading ramp and mechanical leg.
Flock built a surveillance data repository with convenient sharing mechanisms. Someone then used those mechanisms as designed for their intended purpose.
Did they? The cops shared with other state agencies who then shared with the feds. From what I understand of the situation the cops didn’t break the law, which is the problem.
> Twice, however, OPD staffers searched their system explicitly on behalf of the FBI.
And "other California police departments" are California cops subject to SB34, too.
> Rather, other California police departments searched Oakland’s system on behalf of federal counterparts more than 200 times — providing reasons such as “FBI investigation” for the searches — which appears to mirror a strategy first reported by 404 Media, in which federal agencies that don’t have contracts with Flock turn to local police for backdoor access.
If I build a sidewalk curb, there's a perfectly legitimate use case for it. It can also be used to curb-stomp someone to death.
Can't we build the curb and forbid curb-stomping at the same time? Shouldn't that be our right?