A City Canceled Flock's Contract. Flock Ignored It. Police Chief Unplugged Them

Posted by smurda 1 day ago

Comments

Comment by wilbo 1 day ago

Anyone looking for the context or background since it isn't linked in the article: https://www.thedrive.com/news/how-flock-cameras-wrongly-trac...

Edit: (I was wrong, they're linked. Must have just taken a while to load link formatting or something?)

Comment by cowlevel 1 day ago

Next step: flock sues the city federally and wins somehow

Comment by Eddy_Viscosity2 1 day ago

SCOTUS will rule that because the framers didn't specifically and explicitly say that local governments could cancel flock contracts, that therefore they cannot and must continue to both pay them forever and give them access to any location for cameras that they want.

Comment by 7e 1 day ago

Unless the cameras facilitate abortions or somehow aid Democratic candidates for office.

Comment by vaadu 14 hours ago

City should keep them until Flock says, under oath, who paid to keep them running.

Comment by reilly3000 1 day ago

I wish more police chiefs took their role so seriously and practically. Commander Vimes would surely commend this man.

Comment by scrtm 1 day ago

seems like Flock doesn't care at all about these incidents/bugs considering they've not responded in over a month beyond their local (presumably sales) rep. probably just a matter of time before this results in an Automated Death By Cop oopsie.

Comment by DLA 1 day ago

The poles are likely not Flock property. Yank the cameras down and impound them.

Comment by jsbisviewtiful 1 day ago

Arrest the Flock CEO and the board. Start holding companies accountable.

Comment by skeledrew 1 day ago

Sucks that it took an incident for the cancelation to be triggered.

Comment by raggi 1 day ago

The city should start charging them rent for the pole space.

Comment by ksudb 1 day ago

[dead]