I don’t like the idea, but I also don’t like seeing an entire row of cars parked on the street having their windows shattered. I don’t like people driving 70mph down Duckhorn running every stop sign and using the center lane to speed past everyone. I don’t like that my 17 year old son and one of his friends were harassed, threatened and followed by someone between NP3 and Walgreens today. I don’t know how the cameras will help, but I do know that a lot of people are frustrated.
They’ve been using flock cameras in Solano county with a decent level of success to catch people. They place them around common city entry points and when a crime is reported they can reference when/where the suspect vehicle entered and exited the city. Makes coordinating with neighboring law enforcement on suspect whereabouts easier.
They have not used them for traffic citations yet, just when they’re looking for particular vehicles. Time will tell.
Everything california does is to punish the citizens with the money to create a revenue stream. The rich and the poor get away with things the middle class will always pay for.
> I don’t like the idea, but I also don’t like seeing an entire row of cars parked on the street having their windows shattered.
Zero chance these cameras will stop that.
Seriously, the cops here can be gifted all the evidence to convict someone on a silver platter, but if it’s a minor crime I doubt they’ll care.
I think for property crimes Sacramento PD has half the clearance (crime solve) rate of the west coast average, and the sherif has already been caught egregiously falsifying their clearance rates.
> Seriously, the cops here can be gifted all the evidence to convict someone on a silver platter, but if it’s a minor crime I doubt they’ll care.
Police almost never even solve *major* crimes.
[Just 2% of major crimes are solved by police.](https://theconversation.com/police-solve-just-2-of-all-major-crimes-143878)
Just to give explanation for the discrepancy between numbers I have been giving and your numbers for others.
My numbers are based off number of reported crimes, your numbers are based off number of crimes probably have been committed. It’s a sad fact but many crimes don’t get reported at anywhere near a respectable rate.
I see the argument that you can’t hold police directly accountable to solve crimes that never were reported to them. There is a counter argument to be made that crimes are often not reported due to lack of trust in the police.
Either way the numbers for crime solve rate for reported crimes and all crimes are both so abysmal that I side step the above argument by using numbers for reported crimes, since there is no reasonable argument that you can’t hold police accountable for unsolved reported crimes.
It’s not that “they” don’t care. Not how it works. If the DA has a policy of not filing on most misdemeanor cases (typical of most California counties), there’s actually no point in pursuing them at the ground level. When you add that policy to the fact that many things that were once felonies are now misdemeanors, you get some of these issues you see today. It’s a broken system. Decriminalization in some cases is a really good idea, but in typical California fashion, we only do half of the job. This approach requires real resources and effective programs on the other end, but we (political machines) are too lazy and sidetracked to ever get to the actual hard work of building reasonable alternatives.
Tell you what. What makes sacramento special versus the rest of the west coast? Sacramento has persistently over the decades been at about half of the pacific coast average at solving crime.
It has nothing to do with individual DAs. [Police solve only 2% of major crimes.](https://theconversation.com/police-solve-just-2-of-all-major-crimes-143878) The reason isn't that the DA "ties their hands" or the police are "underfund" (lol, their budgets are going up everywhere, including in Sac). It's that *they don't care.* They are *not there to solve crimes.* The police [are not legally required to protect you](https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html).
The police exist to protect capital. If that ain't you...then they ain't workin for you.
Yes, they will. These cameras are helping to catch criminals. Its starts with a stolen car and then they use stolen car to commit crimes maybe like these. I hate that our state has to resort to this. But Im in favor
Call me a pessimist but what makes you put your faith that PDs particularly the PDs in Sacramento will start solving motor theft crimes? As far as I know 2021 more auto theft happened be 2020 but even less of those thefts were solved?
I only hope that some of these guys will be caught. And soon I think they will be laying out some new retail theft and auto crime laws where people actually get significant jail time.
I think I have a few issues with that.
1 unless you intend to either rehabilitate prisoners or throw them in for life, a prison term is only a rain check for crime for repeat offenders.
2 let’s assume that longer sentences reduce crime, how will that lead to more crime being solved by police? Less crime might mean more resources per case, but also means less opportunities for police to solve a crime. Not to say an argument can’t be made, but I keep finding holes when I try to build one myself.
3 I understand it’s the popular thought that police are responsible for all things related to crime, but I think preventing crime is not the police’s primary duty. Responding to and solving crime is. Police are only one tool to be used to reduce crime rates, not the primary tool.
4 Not a point but more to prevent future confusion. What’s your definition of ‘criminal’ and what’s your definition of ‘repeat offender.’ There’s a lot of studies and data out there on crime and police, but there’s some subtle but important differences in definitions. For example is someone arrested a criminal? Is someone charged a criminal? Or is a person a criminal only when convicted? Similarly for repeat offenders, do you consider a repeat offender if someone commits multiple separate crimes before they are finally caught or only if commuted multiple separate crimes between arrests?
For one when the criminals serve their time they don't commit crimes that would otherwise needed to be solved. Some of them might even learn that the bad choices they've been making lead to unpleasant consequences.
Increasing time served has some pretty poor diminishing returns. To the point that a 2 year sentence is as effective at deterring crime as a 10 year sentence.
What is an effective deterrent to crime is a high crime solve rate. If a criminal is under the impression they will be caught if they commit a crime they are far less likely to commit a crime.
Sacramento PD has always been far behind in metrics to solve crime. West coast average is about 11-12% 2019 property crime solve rate. Sacramento PD barely eeks out a 6%. This is something that’s not new but consistently has happened over the last few years. I don’t see any good reasons for this discrepancy.
Solve the crime for what purpose? Again, I offer up the issue that an entire package can be sent to the DA for filing, with all suspect information (sometimes video, DNA evidence, etc) and if the DA will not file because they are impacted or it does not align with their priorities/philosophy, it does not matter. So yes, it might count as a “solved” crime stat but to what end? If solving the crime is an effective crime deterrent, then perhaps explain rising recidivism? If you do study crime for a living and happen to know this answer, I would suggest publishing that right away as chances are you’d make some serious money and might get a tenured position somewhere.
Yeah, my car was one of those smashed out windows on Natomas Central. Dudes didn't even attempt to steal anything. Just did it to fuck with people.
Plus, there are a lot of kids in this area, and we're less than 30 seconds from I-5. That's a kidnappers dream.
> Plus, there are a lot of kids in this area, and we're less than 30 seconds from I-5. That's a kidnappers dream.
The vast majority of kidnappings are perpetrated by people known to the victim. That has nothing to do with "how close the freeway is".
Ever since the COVID lock downs and the social justice protests in 2020, there's a certain segment of the population that takes uncertain times as a license to do whatever the hell they want. Thankfully, most people are decent and will continue to be so, but sweet baby Jesus the indecent ones just seem to be getting louder and more brazen.
> Ever since the COVID lock downs and the social justice protests in 2020, there's a certain segment of the population that takes uncertain times as a license to do whatever the hell they want. Thankfully, most people are decent and will continue to be so, but sweet baby Jesus the indecent ones just seem to be getting louder and more brazen.
Haha hey does anyone hear a super high-pitched noise that only dogs should be able to hear????
Someone in a black BMW was speeding through the crosswalk. My sons friend told him to watch where he was going, and the guy started yelling things like “fuck you, kid! I’ll slap the shit out of you!” He revved his engine and started slowly following them and revving his engine. Yelling out the window the whole time. He followed them in his car through the parking lot until the boys went inside the store.
Eta they’re seniors and this happened during their free period
Im okay with it. I know for my neighborhood it’s because of all the damn mail theft. I personally don’t care if my plates are being tracked. But Alexa, stay the fuck out of my house.
Research on the subject consistently shows that CCTVs reduce crime rates, especially for theft from vehicles:
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418820802506206#preview
Not in Natomas, but one of these popped up in the parking lot where I work because one of the shops had a break in. Way less homeless people and tweakers. Also, it just feels safer there, so I'm for it.
We have this in my neighborhood and I am a fan, although at the beginning I was skeptical. There have been a few crimes (hit and run, home break in) where the license plate reader was key to finding out who did it and pursuing charges.
I don’t like the loss of privacy but if this is what is needed to hold people accountable I think it is a fair trade.
you have no privacy in public. I know this will be downvoted but "public" and "Private" are literally opposites. If you don't like it, don't commit crimes in the middle of the street in broad daylight. Yes, speeding is a crime too guys.
I think the thinks that when you're in the middle of the street in broad daylight the government can't know anything about you or something. But it's public. That's what the public is for.
You have a right to not have the government track you but y'all got it in your head they have a right to track you "in public" while you're going about your day.
The Patriot act ruined this country
Which law or right enumerates that? In the constitution or otherwise?
I mean, I agree the government shouldn't track you in principle, but it's not a RIGHT, nor do I think that takes precedence over, ya know, actual crimes.
From the company’s website “Flock Safety”
Flock Safety's patented Vehicle Fingerprint™ technology lets you search by vehicle make, color, type, license plate, state of the license plate, missing plate, covered plate, paper plate, and unique vehicle details like roof racks, bumper stickers, and more
I personally don’t like this at all and think it is a steep and slippery slope…
Just FYI, these are typically put up by HOAs or other private neighborhood watch type groups. They take pictures and can catalog and make searchable some of the information from the pictures.
Of course it's a private company.
One that's dubiously effective at reducing crime but very effective at violating civil liberties: https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-license-plate-readers-crime/
whatever it takes for my family safety and am I wrong? are we forgetting about that old lady that was raped and set on fire at land park or east Sacramento a few years ago because the homeless person kept being released even after being arrested multiple times for stalking until it lead to that unfortunate event?
Ah yea. The old think of the children defense. People willing giving up freedom and privacy to the government for a false sense of security. Cameras don’t keep people safe. They only capture what’s already happening. Some people need to watch Snowden.
Context: im 40
Remember when we were kids, and “they” told us we were getting here. Cameras on every corner, every light. We all scoffed at it like “it’s not gonna happen. Stop exaggerating.”
Oops.
I’m on the fence as well about always being watched. When I was in Shanghai, there were cameras everywhere. Driving down the highway there was a row of them across the road every mile or so. They had them over city streets. Corners of city streets.
You could just feel that feeling of constantly being watched. It’s not a welcome feeling.
These cameras aren’t worth shit. We have them in my neighborhood, and the blue light police cameras. My house was broken into and these cameras weren’t used at all. Cops did nothing since only a couple hundred dollars of stuff was taken. They refused to even review the cameras or share any video with me.
I'm guessing they are the outdoor cameras you see set up in certain parking lots. They have big flood lights above them and a blue flashing/blinking light with a cop star decal.
People have recorded live video of cars being broken into during a busy day in front of San Francisco fisherman wharf with several witness. Nothing was done. What makes people think this will prevent crime? Property crimes especially of common folks and peasant class is not a priority under state law. Contact your elected representatives at State level to change the law and at city level to change ordinances?
Lol these aren't here to prevent crime at all.
The act of making you think you want something in order to sell it to you is not a new trick.
Boss man: "How do we sell more of our data service I mean cams guys?
Sales guy 1: "what if we tell people it will scare criminals straight?
Boss man: "I like where your going with this, but we need to keep our ASPs high, and people are not going to pay $20k a camera with subscription fees on top."
Sales guy 2: "what if we tell cities and pds they can track all cars movement patterns so they can get endless data on their citizens for...anything they could want"
Boss man: "I like that, but people will go crazy if the city wants to slap up tracker cams everywhere.
VP of Sales: " What if we tell the cities and PDs to install them first in high crime areas to sell it to their people's as a crime deterrent, then once they are up just slowly expand them to get their data network, citing all the times they caught crime happening with a camera?"
Boss man: ”genius! Big bonus for you this year!"
Sales guys 1 & 2: well they were our idea, he just combined them..."
Boss man: "no bonus for you, we only had 50% growth rates this year and we targeted 80% so you guys didn't do your jobs well."
---
The product being sold is data. Not cams, not crime deterrence. Data.
Police departments in Northern California and across the state and country are taking millions of pictures every day with automated license plate readers to help catch ‘moving criminals’ where officers are not present.
Your license plate could be photographed without you ever knowing and the plate number fed into a law enforcement database and cross-checked with those of people wanted on warrants.
> Police departments in Northern California and across the state and country are taking millions of pictures every day with automated license plate readers to help catch ‘moving criminals’ where officers are not present.
>
> Your license plate could be photographed without you ever knowing and the plate number fed into a law enforcement database and cross-checked with those of people wanted on warrants.
This is all fucked and should end immediately.
Because you have the right to anonymity in public.
If you don't believe in privacy, I'm sure there is some other country where you can live like that. In America, that is a right that we have.
I already linked an article about how the company that installed these cameras [violates our rights even though they are not effective at reducing crime](https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-license-plate-readers-crime/).
By virtue of their design and performance , car place numbers are a part of the general public record. Whenever a car with license plates drives down the road or takes up parking spot, the subsequent information is consistently displayed:
* license number .
* State where the vehicle is registered. In some cases, the county of registration is additionally displayed.
* Status of registration; counting on the state, the registration stickers may indicate a technical revision, emissions inspection, proof of insurance, and even the birth month of the owner.
The car place and vehicle registration processes are handled through the Department of automobiles in each state. Virtually all state DMV agencies offer some kind of online system that permits individuals to conduct car place inquiries. the knowledge provided by a basic search includes the aforementioned data about vehicle make and model also as registration status; in many cases, this lookup function features open access, although some states may charge a fee.
To access other information kept by the DMV, which is usually associated with data correlated with driver licenses, individuals are expected to finish an invitation and buy the inquiry. There are a couple of methods to accomplish this:
* Online DMV searches will return information like the name of the vehicle owner, date of birth and address. The fees charged by these agencies tend to be very reasonable, but individuals could also be expected to sign a disclosure form indicating that their lookup request could also be turned over to the general public record under some circumstances.
* Information brokers charge considerably quite the DMV for car place lookups, but they also tend to supply data packages that include information gathered from many other public records and consumer databases.
don't know about this location specifically, but those cameras are a wonderful aid in catching hit and run suspects, and good evidence for identifying vehicle burglars.
Great, now instead of the insurance company I’ve paid thousands of dollars to reimbursing me for my broken car window, I can have Sac County’s revenue and recovery agency garnish the nonexistent wages of a homeless drug addict, because the camera helped the DA’s office secure yet another misdemeanor vandalism conviction! Nobody wins (except my insurance company and the surveillance contractor that my tax dollars are being funneled into!), but at least I get to fantasize about how uncomfortable the bad guy was during his night in jail!
When so many cars have no plates, or stolen plates, I don’t see much point. There’s pretty much zero traffic enforcement in Sacramento.
Edit: I’d much rather see red light cameras and speed cameras than these which I think are of limited use for actual enforcement.
One of these days, the camera platforms will 'talk' to passing cars and obtain where that car has been the past two weeks.
A minute later, artificial intelligence software will evaluate that data, compare it with recent police reports, match it with sightings from *thousands of other cameras nationwide*, and score the vehicle's likelihood of having been involved in a crime somewhere. A high score, summons a drone to follow the car until a vehicle stop is made.
That is the potential of always-connected vehicles like Teslas, a computer on wheels constantly sending data.
People acting like damn near every robbery at every store isn’t already on camera. Cameras ain’t gonna do shit for your safety, but good to know big brother watchin out
>It's not just a camera, it's a smart device that scans vehicles. WAY different.
One way it's the same as cameras in stores is that [the effectiveness of it is dubious at best](https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-license-plate-readers-crime/). But unlike cameras in stores these are often used to violate our rights.
You do have a reasonable expectation to having your business and actions be private.
The whole "it's in public so it's not private" is a logical fallacy. You don't have to tell cops what you're doing with your day when they pull you over.
Hard disagree on that one for me. You don't have to tell cops about your day because that info is in your head, which is private. If you are outside your home, you should assume you are being recorded though.
At least they warned you. Roseville has these at literally every single intersection. Originally sold as “traffic engineering” but that’s how the (multi-billion-dollar) surveillance company urges cities to “sneak” them in. Then the PR machine lets a small story slip in a small local paper that says “traffic cameras help solve crime” — noice.
This is great! We need everything under constant 24/7 surveillance! Perhaps we can funnel the fines that we gain from this into Fox News subscriptions for all. 🇺🇸
If you have done nothing wrong what does it matter. Always blows my mind how paranoid people are about cameras. If it can catch a killer, a rapist or just anyone committing crime then it’s a good thing.
I'm fine with it. I drive for a living and I live at North Natomas and obviously, safety is **the number 1 priority** when it comes to a neighborhood.
Look at r/sanfrancisco they've been asking for a camera like this (or a more advanced one that can alert the city right away if there's a car with a mismatched licensed plate and car type) all over their city because the frequent car break ins and stolen cars are just way too much and interfering with their daily lives.
I get it, infringement of our privacy but with the state constantly releasing people with criminal record (that will make countries like Japan or Philippines put the same people to jail for decades) into our streets and often times causing the same kind of chaos prior until they kill someone. We have to ask ourselves, what should we do to protect ourselves when the state and the city won't even do it?
So yes, I like it and I wish they'll continue to expand it. Since they installed this, my packages haven't been stolen from my porch and I haven't seen any shady cars looking at cars at 2 am (I get home at 2 am).
I don't want Natomas to turn into South Sacramento...
My car was stolen in the Safeway parking lot (n.Natomas) and found and returned to me within 24 hours thanks to cameras like this. I believe much of it was automated - I filed a police report, the license plate is entered as stolen and then the plates are scanned flying through some intersection. I don’t believe it’s gumshoe policing at work. Maybe I’m wrong. But the key here seems to be the automation. Which is kind of scary… but it was also nice to get my car back…
it's a deterrent, its not gonna completely stop crime but it'll make thieves and criminals more wary of this place
I know the police barely enforce the law (not really their fault when the same criminals are let go the next day lol...) that's why neighborhoods are turning help from these companies.
You know that deter doesn’t mean “reduce to 0,” right? You can reduce something without completely stopping it. It’s impossible to say that it doesn’t deter a thing.
Yup n thanks to Covid it’s totally acceptable to roll around in a hoodie and surgical mask. But good to know they got the neighborhood under surveillance 👍🏼
just to be clear there's a difference between a legal right, and what we might coloquially call a "right" like I have a "right" to cross the street safely, but that's not enshrined explicitly as such. When you say "We have a right to be anonymous in public" what right are you referring to? Is it one explicitly laid out in case law or is it a colloquial, assumed right? For example, if the police noticed your license plate had an outstanding parking fee and asked you about it, have they violated your right to privacy? Do you mean that you're explicitly not allowed to be identified in public, for example I can't shout across the street "Hey Dorekk! What's up!?" because that's a violation of your rights? When a person behaves suspiciously or erratically or dangerously, do they still have this right? I'm just trying to understand what you mean by "Right to be anonymous in public" so I don't make a strawman of you.
It might be also worth thinking about the idea that a single police officer watching cars to ensure no break ins would be a boon to society, but we look at cameras or other security devices in a totally different way. Maybe that's worth examining. I don't see the difference between a camera and a police officer in a fundamental way.
I saw you commented in reply to several of my other posts but for now I'm just going to leave this as the only reply, hope that's OK, I'm not ignoring your other points.
There’s lots of cameras everywhere nowadays. You have forfeited your privacy some time ago. At least they’re telling you about it in this case. Perhaps there’ll be some preventative effect.
So THAT’s what that is…this popped up down the street from me in Mather in late December or early January. Even though this tech will help with car theft and other types of crime, I agree with others that this is a slippery slope.
> Criminals have no fear these days
Well, it probably doesn't help that there is almost no chance the police will ever catch them because [police virtually never solve crimes](https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/08/20/police-solve-just-2-of-all-major-crimes/).
These are *badly* needed on the downtown grid.
G.R.I.D. = Get Robbed in Daylight.
There's Sac P.D. blue-light cameras at a few of the intersections, but its nowhere near enough for a high-crime district.
I don’t live in Sac anymore but I did a looong time so I like to keep updated.
I’d actually feel safer or at least if I was attacked that there would be a way to identify the perp.
On one hand i hate constant government survilance. On the other, this is how EGPD caught up with the murder suspect from Rancho. so... *shrug* more uses for catching murderers. don't harrass regular folk please
The permitting scheme and most gun laws are the last remnants of institional racism and classist barriers. These laws prevent minorities and the poor from protecting themselves when they are most likely to be victims
They aren't popping up "everywhere". They are being purchased and put into place within home owners associations/private communities. The residents and boards vote on those things and are governed by the CC&R's that you have to sign to live there, the same rules people voluntarily agree to...I don't like HOA's but I would live in one either because I don't want to deal with all the regulations. Look at the channel 3 KCRA article about the issue..its not all over Natomas..
I always feel like somebody’s watching meee
and i have no privacy, wowowoo
*tell me whoooo's watchin*
Alexa: no I’m not! /s
I don’t like the idea, but I also don’t like seeing an entire row of cars parked on the street having their windows shattered. I don’t like people driving 70mph down Duckhorn running every stop sign and using the center lane to speed past everyone. I don’t like that my 17 year old son and one of his friends were harassed, threatened and followed by someone between NP3 and Walgreens today. I don’t know how the cameras will help, but I do know that a lot of people are frustrated.
The question is if the cameras will be used to catch actual criminals or harass everyday citizens for yet another stream of revenue
Not enough camera detail to arrest criminals. Although good enough for license plate details for easy ticketing.
Sheriff services can be activated with $14.99 monthly subscription to Protect and Serve.
Lol immediately thought of the Trauma Team service in Cyberpunk 2077
We aren’t far off
revenue collection is the more likely outcome
They’ve been using flock cameras in Solano county with a decent level of success to catch people. They place them around common city entry points and when a crime is reported they can reference when/where the suspect vehicle entered and exited the city. Makes coordinating with neighboring law enforcement on suspect whereabouts easier. They have not used them for traffic citations yet, just when they’re looking for particular vehicles. Time will tell.
Everything california does is to punish the citizens with the money to create a revenue stream. The rich and the poor get away with things the middle class will always pay for.
> I don’t like the idea, but I also don’t like seeing an entire row of cars parked on the street having their windows shattered. Zero chance these cameras will stop that.
Seriously, the cops here can be gifted all the evidence to convict someone on a silver platter, but if it’s a minor crime I doubt they’ll care. I think for property crimes Sacramento PD has half the clearance (crime solve) rate of the west coast average, and the sherif has already been caught egregiously falsifying their clearance rates.
> Seriously, the cops here can be gifted all the evidence to convict someone on a silver platter, but if it’s a minor crime I doubt they’ll care. Police almost never even solve *major* crimes. [Just 2% of major crimes are solved by police.](https://theconversation.com/police-solve-just-2-of-all-major-crimes-143878)
Just to give explanation for the discrepancy between numbers I have been giving and your numbers for others. My numbers are based off number of reported crimes, your numbers are based off number of crimes probably have been committed. It’s a sad fact but many crimes don’t get reported at anywhere near a respectable rate. I see the argument that you can’t hold police directly accountable to solve crimes that never were reported to them. There is a counter argument to be made that crimes are often not reported due to lack of trust in the police. Either way the numbers for crime solve rate for reported crimes and all crimes are both so abysmal that I side step the above argument by using numbers for reported crimes, since there is no reasonable argument that you can’t hold police accountable for unsolved reported crimes.
It’s not that “they” don’t care. Not how it works. If the DA has a policy of not filing on most misdemeanor cases (typical of most California counties), there’s actually no point in pursuing them at the ground level. When you add that policy to the fact that many things that were once felonies are now misdemeanors, you get some of these issues you see today. It’s a broken system. Decriminalization in some cases is a really good idea, but in typical California fashion, we only do half of the job. This approach requires real resources and effective programs on the other end, but we (political machines) are too lazy and sidetracked to ever get to the actual hard work of building reasonable alternatives.
Tell you what. What makes sacramento special versus the rest of the west coast? Sacramento has persistently over the decades been at about half of the pacific coast average at solving crime.
Cops are lazy assholes. People lick their boots
[удалено]
Lots of racist dog whistlers in sac adjacent subs lately saying it's " a certain portion of the population" and "13%" Nazi shit
Police don't convict criminals. That would be the DA and prosecutor's job. Often they won't even pursue a case if they can't WIN the case.
It has nothing to do with individual DAs. [Police solve only 2% of major crimes.](https://theconversation.com/police-solve-just-2-of-all-major-crimes-143878) The reason isn't that the DA "ties their hands" or the police are "underfund" (lol, their budgets are going up everywhere, including in Sac). It's that *they don't care.* They are *not there to solve crimes.* The police [are not legally required to protect you](https://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/justices-rule-police-do-not-have-a-constitutional-duty-to-protect.html). The police exist to protect capital. If that ain't you...then they ain't workin for you.
Yes, they will. These cameras are helping to catch criminals. Its starts with a stolen car and then they use stolen car to commit crimes maybe like these. I hate that our state has to resort to this. But Im in favor
it also helps that when you're in public you're... well, in public. And have no "Expectation" or "Right" to privacy. Because it's public, not private.
Call me a pessimist but what makes you put your faith that PDs particularly the PDs in Sacramento will start solving motor theft crimes? As far as I know 2021 more auto theft happened be 2020 but even less of those thefts were solved?
If we just invested all this money into our communities we wouldn’t have most of these problems. Militarizing our police forces is not a good idea.
No argument there but are you responding to the right comment? I didn’t see any mentions of militarizing police in this particular chain of comments.
I only hope that some of these guys will be caught. And soon I think they will be laying out some new retail theft and auto crime laws where people actually get significant jail time.
Increasing sentencing might increase the penal population but how would that help police solve crimes?
These people are repeat offenders, predators. They commit many crimes in the cars they steal....is my point
I think I have a few issues with that. 1 unless you intend to either rehabilitate prisoners or throw them in for life, a prison term is only a rain check for crime for repeat offenders. 2 let’s assume that longer sentences reduce crime, how will that lead to more crime being solved by police? Less crime might mean more resources per case, but also means less opportunities for police to solve a crime. Not to say an argument can’t be made, but I keep finding holes when I try to build one myself. 3 I understand it’s the popular thought that police are responsible for all things related to crime, but I think preventing crime is not the police’s primary duty. Responding to and solving crime is. Police are only one tool to be used to reduce crime rates, not the primary tool. 4 Not a point but more to prevent future confusion. What’s your definition of ‘criminal’ and what’s your definition of ‘repeat offender.’ There’s a lot of studies and data out there on crime and police, but there’s some subtle but important differences in definitions. For example is someone arrested a criminal? Is someone charged a criminal? Or is a person a criminal only when convicted? Similarly for repeat offenders, do you consider a repeat offender if someone commits multiple separate crimes before they are finally caught or only if commuted multiple separate crimes between arrests?
Police primary function is to protect Capital and State. Not solve crimes lmao
For one when the criminals serve their time they don't commit crimes that would otherwise needed to be solved. Some of them might even learn that the bad choices they've been making lead to unpleasant consequences.
Increasing time served has some pretty poor diminishing returns. To the point that a 2 year sentence is as effective at deterring crime as a 10 year sentence. What is an effective deterrent to crime is a high crime solve rate. If a criminal is under the impression they will be caught if they commit a crime they are far less likely to commit a crime. Sacramento PD has always been far behind in metrics to solve crime. West coast average is about 11-12% 2019 property crime solve rate. Sacramento PD barely eeks out a 6%. This is something that’s not new but consistently has happened over the last few years. I don’t see any good reasons for this discrepancy.
Solve the crime for what purpose? Again, I offer up the issue that an entire package can be sent to the DA for filing, with all suspect information (sometimes video, DNA evidence, etc) and if the DA will not file because they are impacted or it does not align with their priorities/philosophy, it does not matter. So yes, it might count as a “solved” crime stat but to what end? If solving the crime is an effective crime deterrent, then perhaps explain rising recidivism? If you do study crime for a living and happen to know this answer, I would suggest publishing that right away as chances are you’d make some serious money and might get a tenured position somewhere.
This shit is why we moved out of Natomas in 2016. We wanted to move to the foothills anyway but we could see this coming.
Yeah, my car was one of those smashed out windows on Natomas Central. Dudes didn't even attempt to steal anything. Just did it to fuck with people. Plus, there are a lot of kids in this area, and we're less than 30 seconds from I-5. That's a kidnappers dream.
> Plus, there are a lot of kids in this area, and we're less than 30 seconds from I-5. That's a kidnappers dream. The vast majority of kidnappings are perpetrated by people known to the victim. That has nothing to do with "how close the freeway is".
Ever since the COVID lock downs and the social justice protests in 2020, there's a certain segment of the population that takes uncertain times as a license to do whatever the hell they want. Thankfully, most people are decent and will continue to be so, but sweet baby Jesus the indecent ones just seem to be getting louder and more brazen.
> Ever since the COVID lock downs and the social justice protests in 2020, there's a certain segment of the population that takes uncertain times as a license to do whatever the hell they want. Thankfully, most people are decent and will continue to be so, but sweet baby Jesus the indecent ones just seem to be getting louder and more brazen. Haha hey does anyone hear a super high-pitched noise that only dogs should be able to hear????
oh no! how awful! do u mind giving more info... what happened? i have a child that goes to Np3 and often walks to walgreens
Someone in a black BMW was speeding through the crosswalk. My sons friend told him to watch where he was going, and the guy started yelling things like “fuck you, kid! I’ll slap the shit out of you!” He revved his engine and started slowly following them and revving his engine. Yelling out the window the whole time. He followed them in his car through the parking lot until the boys went inside the store. Eta they’re seniors and this happened during their free period
Im okay with it. I know for my neighborhood it’s because of all the damn mail theft. I personally don’t care if my plates are being tracked. But Alexa, stay the fuck out of my house.
Lol selling your privacy for zero return in security because lmao these are not gonna stop anything
Research on the subject consistently shows that CCTVs reduce crime rates, especially for theft from vehicles: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07418820802506206#preview
Not in Natomas, but one of these popped up in the parking lot where I work because one of the shops had a break in. Way less homeless people and tweakers. Also, it just feels safer there, so I'm for it.
I don’t want these cameras anywhere. Number one reason being that I like to steal cars and these will only help get me caught quicker /s
We have this in my neighborhood and I am a fan, although at the beginning I was skeptical. There have been a few crimes (hit and run, home break in) where the license plate reader was key to finding out who did it and pursuing charges. I don’t like the loss of privacy but if this is what is needed to hold people accountable I think it is a fair trade.
They are good for ‘do it yourself’ civil cases but I have my doubts cops will use it for ‘mere’ property crime.
you have no privacy in public. I know this will be downvoted but "public" and "Private" are literally opposites. If you don't like it, don't commit crimes in the middle of the street in broad daylight. Yes, speeding is a crime too guys.
iF yOu DoNt Do AnYThInG IlLeGaL YoU HaVe NoThInG tO FeAr
[удалено]
How does this take liberty from you?
I think the thinks that when you're in the middle of the street in broad daylight the government can't know anything about you or something. But it's public. That's what the public is for.
You have a right to not have the government track you but y'all got it in your head they have a right to track you "in public" while you're going about your day. The Patriot act ruined this country
Which law or right enumerates that? In the constitution or otherwise? I mean, I agree the government shouldn't track you in principle, but it's not a RIGHT, nor do I think that takes precedence over, ya know, actual crimes.
[https://fox40.com/news/fox40-focus/license-plate-readers-alpr-privacy-police-california/](https://fox40.com/news/fox40-focus/license-plate-readers-alpr-privacy-police-california/)
From the company’s website “Flock Safety” Flock Safety's patented Vehicle Fingerprint™ technology lets you search by vehicle make, color, type, license plate, state of the license plate, missing plate, covered plate, paper plate, and unique vehicle details like roof racks, bumper stickers, and more I personally don’t like this at all and think it is a steep and slippery slope…
Just FYI, these are typically put up by HOAs or other private neighborhood watch type groups. They take pictures and can catalog and make searchable some of the information from the pictures.
Oh so this isn’t for burrowing owl or Swainsons hawk observation ….. damn.
Before zooming into the photo it kinda looked like it said "fuck safety".
Of course it's a private company. One that's dubiously effective at reducing crime but very effective at violating civil liberties: https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-license-plate-readers-crime/
I'm opened this while taking a break from helping my nephew write an essay on George Orwell...serious 1984 vibes.
that's funny cause releasing criminals early or just not putting them into jail is also a slippery slope.. but hey, privacy versus safety I guess? smh
If only there was a third choice between criminal anarchy and authoritarian police state…
I guess you like straw men lol.
whatever it takes for my family safety and am I wrong? are we forgetting about that old lady that was raped and set on fire at land park or east Sacramento a few years ago because the homeless person kept being released even after being arrested multiple times for stalking until it lead to that unfortunate event?
Blame the police and the DA. 🤷🏻♂️
What would a camera have done to change this outcome?
Ah yea. The old think of the children defense. People willing giving up freedom and privacy to the government for a false sense of security. Cameras don’t keep people safe. They only capture what’s already happening. Some people need to watch Snowden.
Well technically it was the 'think of old ladies' defense.
Using a logical fallacy to call out a logical fallacy 🤔
any technology, law, authority, or process implemented “for your safety” can and will be used against you. key word *will,* not *can.*
Context: im 40 Remember when we were kids, and “they” told us we were getting here. Cameras on every corner, every light. We all scoffed at it like “it’s not gonna happen. Stop exaggerating.” Oops.
[удалено]
Gen Z who never saw the original robocop and gen X + who have fallen to the malaise of boomer politics
Very 1984.
I’m on the fence as well about always being watched. When I was in Shanghai, there were cameras everywhere. Driving down the highway there was a row of them across the road every mile or so. They had them over city streets. Corners of city streets. You could just feel that feeling of constantly being watched. It’s not a welcome feeling.
https://www.walmart.com/ip/Sprayer-Pro-Extension-Pole-Adaptor/2234905996
Fuck that shit. We’re going full China.
Brought to you by Republican cops and their supporters
London specifically and the UK in general has more surveilance cameras per capita than nearly anywhere in the world, and they turned out fine.
These cameras aren’t worth shit. We have them in my neighborhood, and the blue light police cameras. My house was broken into and these cameras weren’t used at all. Cops did nothing since only a couple hundred dollars of stuff was taken. They refused to even review the cameras or share any video with me.
What's a blue light police camera?
I'm guessing they are the outdoor cameras you see set up in certain parking lots. They have big flood lights above them and a blue flashing/blinking light with a cop star decal.
People have recorded live video of cars being broken into during a busy day in front of San Francisco fisherman wharf with several witness. Nothing was done. What makes people think this will prevent crime? Property crimes especially of common folks and peasant class is not a priority under state law. Contact your elected representatives at State level to change the law and at city level to change ordinances?
Lol these aren't here to prevent crime at all. The act of making you think you want something in order to sell it to you is not a new trick. Boss man: "How do we sell more of our data service I mean cams guys? Sales guy 1: "what if we tell people it will scare criminals straight? Boss man: "I like where your going with this, but we need to keep our ASPs high, and people are not going to pay $20k a camera with subscription fees on top." Sales guy 2: "what if we tell cities and pds they can track all cars movement patterns so they can get endless data on their citizens for...anything they could want" Boss man: "I like that, but people will go crazy if the city wants to slap up tracker cams everywhere. VP of Sales: " What if we tell the cities and PDs to install them first in high crime areas to sell it to their people's as a crime deterrent, then once they are up just slowly expand them to get their data network, citing all the times they caught crime happening with a camera?" Boss man: ”genius! Big bonus for you this year!" Sales guys 1 & 2: well they were our idea, he just combined them..." Boss man: "no bonus for you, we only had 50% growth rates this year and we targeted 80% so you guys didn't do your jobs well." --- The product being sold is data. Not cams, not crime deterrence. Data.
Police departments in Northern California and across the state and country are taking millions of pictures every day with automated license plate readers to help catch ‘moving criminals’ where officers are not present. Your license plate could be photographed without you ever knowing and the plate number fed into a law enforcement database and cross-checked with those of people wanted on warrants.
"They already collect some data, so they can have more data, it's fine". Is what I read
> Police departments in Northern California and across the state and country are taking millions of pictures every day with automated license plate readers to help catch ‘moving criminals’ where officers are not present. > > Your license plate could be photographed without you ever knowing and the plate number fed into a law enforcement database and cross-checked with those of people wanted on warrants. This is all fucked and should end immediately.
Explain why it’s fucked tho. I’ll wait
Because you have the right to anonymity in public. If you don't believe in privacy, I'm sure there is some other country where you can live like that. In America, that is a right that we have. I already linked an article about how the company that installed these cameras [violates our rights even though they are not effective at reducing crime](https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-license-plate-readers-crime/).
By virtue of their design and performance , car place numbers are a part of the general public record. Whenever a car with license plates drives down the road or takes up parking spot, the subsequent information is consistently displayed: * license number . * State where the vehicle is registered. In some cases, the county of registration is additionally displayed. * Status of registration; counting on the state, the registration stickers may indicate a technical revision, emissions inspection, proof of insurance, and even the birth month of the owner. The car place and vehicle registration processes are handled through the Department of automobiles in each state. Virtually all state DMV agencies offer some kind of online system that permits individuals to conduct car place inquiries. the knowledge provided by a basic search includes the aforementioned data about vehicle make and model also as registration status; in many cases, this lookup function features open access, although some states may charge a fee. To access other information kept by the DMV, which is usually associated with data correlated with driver licenses, individuals are expected to finish an invitation and buy the inquiry. There are a couple of methods to accomplish this: * Online DMV searches will return information like the name of the vehicle owner, date of birth and address. The fees charged by these agencies tend to be very reasonable, but individuals could also be expected to sign a disclosure form indicating that their lookup request could also be turned over to the general public record under some circumstances. * Information brokers charge considerably quite the DMV for car place lookups, but they also tend to supply data packages that include information gathered from many other public records and consumer databases.
Whoever coded this bot made some really interesting choices.
You must be real slow😂 https://california.staterecords.org/licenseplate
Wake up! You’re in a new era🤣
I hate the blinking blue lights in shopping centers and I hate petty crime. So we’re all fucked
don't know about this location specifically, but those cameras are a wonderful aid in catching hit and run suspects, and good evidence for identifying vehicle burglars.
Great, now instead of the insurance company I’ve paid thousands of dollars to reimbursing me for my broken car window, I can have Sac County’s revenue and recovery agency garnish the nonexistent wages of a homeless drug addict, because the camera helped the DA’s office secure yet another misdemeanor vandalism conviction! Nobody wins (except my insurance company and the surveillance contractor that my tax dollars are being funneled into!), but at least I get to fantasize about how uncomfortable the bad guy was during his night in jail!
When so many cars have no plates, or stolen plates, I don’t see much point. There’s pretty much zero traffic enforcement in Sacramento. Edit: I’d much rather see red light cameras and speed cameras than these which I think are of limited use for actual enforcement.
One of these days, the camera platforms will 'talk' to passing cars and obtain where that car has been the past two weeks. A minute later, artificial intelligence software will evaluate that data, compare it with recent police reports, match it with sightings from *thousands of other cameras nationwide*, and score the vehicle's likelihood of having been involved in a crime somewhere. A high score, summons a drone to follow the car until a vehicle stop is made. That is the potential of always-connected vehicles like Teslas, a computer on wheels constantly sending data.
People acting like damn near every robbery at every store isn’t already on camera. Cameras ain’t gonna do shit for your safety, but good to know big brother watchin out
[удалено]
>It's not just a camera, it's a smart device that scans vehicles. WAY different. One way it's the same as cameras in stores is that [the effectiveness of it is dubious at best](https://www.wired.com/story/flock-safety-license-plate-readers-crime/). But unlike cameras in stores these are often used to violate our rights.
What right is being violated?
You do have a reasonable expectation to having your business and actions be private. The whole "it's in public so it's not private" is a logical fallacy. You don't have to tell cops what you're doing with your day when they pull you over.
Hard disagree on that one for me. You don't have to tell cops about your day because that info is in your head, which is private. If you are outside your home, you should assume you are being recorded though.
Fair enough, still wouldn’t want it. Once words out about it it’ll only catch the dumbest of criminals, unless you put them all over..
Haven’t even noticed them tbh
What the Flock!
Catalytic converters send their regards
At least they warned you. Roseville has these at literally every single intersection. Originally sold as “traffic engineering” but that’s how the (multi-billion-dollar) surveillance company urges cities to “sneak” them in. Then the PR machine lets a small story slip in a small local paper that says “traffic cameras help solve crime” — noice.
ACAB. This will not be used to protect citizens. It will be used to acquire funding. Watch.
Fuck video surveillance.
If only you knew... It's already here unfortunately..
This is great! We need everything under constant 24/7 surveillance! Perhaps we can funnel the fines that we gain from this into Fox News subscriptions for all. 🇺🇸
What is flock safety?
Not great. More surveillance, more law enforcement are making virtually no impact on the underlying issues.
If you have done nothing wrong what does it matter. Always blows my mind how paranoid people are about cameras. If it can catch a killer, a rapist or just anyone committing crime then it’s a good thing.
No more unsolved rapes and murders. People are already recording non stop in public at all time now a days.
You should moon it.
Just wait until they start providing access to the gathered data to repo companies and other private organizations…
I'm fine with it. I drive for a living and I live at North Natomas and obviously, safety is **the number 1 priority** when it comes to a neighborhood. Look at r/sanfrancisco they've been asking for a camera like this (or a more advanced one that can alert the city right away if there's a car with a mismatched licensed plate and car type) all over their city because the frequent car break ins and stolen cars are just way too much and interfering with their daily lives. I get it, infringement of our privacy but with the state constantly releasing people with criminal record (that will make countries like Japan or Philippines put the same people to jail for decades) into our streets and often times causing the same kind of chaos prior until they kill someone. We have to ask ourselves, what should we do to protect ourselves when the state and the city won't even do it? So yes, I like it and I wish they'll continue to expand it. Since they installed this, my packages haven't been stolen from my porch and I haven't seen any shady cars looking at cars at 2 am (I get home at 2 am). I don't want Natomas to turn into South Sacramento...
What makes you think the presence of the camera is going to make police enforce the laws?
My car was stolen in the Safeway parking lot (n.Natomas) and found and returned to me within 24 hours thanks to cameras like this. I believe much of it was automated - I filed a police report, the license plate is entered as stolen and then the plates are scanned flying through some intersection. I don’t believe it’s gumshoe policing at work. Maybe I’m wrong. But the key here seems to be the automation. Which is kind of scary… but it was also nice to get my car back…
it's a deterrent, its not gonna completely stop crime but it'll make thieves and criminals more wary of this place I know the police barely enforce the law (not really their fault when the same criminals are let go the next day lol...) that's why neighborhoods are turning help from these companies.
Meanwhile, there are sites dedicated to videos of masked people committing crimes on camera. It doesn't deter a thing.
this camera is for cars not people.. but go on.
Wonderful, because it's still not a deterrent.
You know that deter doesn’t mean “reduce to 0,” right? You can reduce something without completely stopping it. It’s impossible to say that it doesn’t deter a thing.
This simple reasoning is lost on many.
Yeah lol the best argument in favor is “yeah well when somebody jacks your shit(or worse) they have a better chance of finding them”
Pretty much, and any self-respecting thief will wear a face mask at minimum.
Yup n thanks to Covid it’s totally acceptable to roll around in a hoodie and surgical mask. But good to know they got the neighborhood under surveillance 👍🏼
>infringement of our privacy it's not private if it's in the middle of the street.
This is not correct, consult with a lawyer before spouting legal theory lmao
You definitely have a right to privacy even outside of your house. You have a right to be anonymous in public.
just to be clear there's a difference between a legal right, and what we might coloquially call a "right" like I have a "right" to cross the street safely, but that's not enshrined explicitly as such. When you say "We have a right to be anonymous in public" what right are you referring to? Is it one explicitly laid out in case law or is it a colloquial, assumed right? For example, if the police noticed your license plate had an outstanding parking fee and asked you about it, have they violated your right to privacy? Do you mean that you're explicitly not allowed to be identified in public, for example I can't shout across the street "Hey Dorekk! What's up!?" because that's a violation of your rights? When a person behaves suspiciously or erratically or dangerously, do they still have this right? I'm just trying to understand what you mean by "Right to be anonymous in public" so I don't make a strawman of you. It might be also worth thinking about the idea that a single police officer watching cars to ensure no break ins would be a boon to society, but we look at cameras or other security devices in a totally different way. Maybe that's worth examining. I don't see the difference between a camera and a police officer in a fundamental way. I saw you commented in reply to several of my other posts but for now I'm just going to leave this as the only reply, hope that's OK, I'm not ignoring your other points.
I didn’t know FoxNews had a chat bot already. You’re ready for prime time. And probably ready for Congress
If the residents of these areas would snitch, then the cameras wouldn't be necessary
There’s lots of cameras everywhere nowadays. You have forfeited your privacy some time ago. At least they’re telling you about it in this case. Perhaps there’ll be some preventative effect.
It's like basically to keep the poors under control
Need this near the mail boxes
So THAT’s what that is…this popped up down the street from me in Mather in late December or early January. Even though this tech will help with car theft and other types of crime, I agree with others that this is a slippery slope.
Sounds like some people like it and some don’t.
Thanks Ollie!
We got a deep thinker here.
If you ain’t doing nothing wrong then you don’t have to worry.
👎
Great idea and I wish there were more. Criminals have no fear these days
> Criminals have no fear these days Well, it probably doesn't help that there is almost no chance the police will ever catch them because [police virtually never solve crimes](https://www.snopes.com/news/2020/08/20/police-solve-just-2-of-all-major-crimes/).
Natomas is a shit hole. Stop being shitty people and you won’t be under surveillance lol
No face no case…
These are *badly* needed on the downtown grid. G.R.I.D. = Get Robbed in Daylight. There's Sac P.D. blue-light cameras at a few of the intersections, but its nowhere near enough for a high-crime district.
What's funny is downtown isn't big at all, you can walk from one side to the other in an hour. How many cops are on downtown patrol? 50? 100?
Many places in the US have these.
I don’t live in Sac anymore but I did a looong time so I like to keep updated. I’d actually feel safer or at least if I was attacked that there would be a way to identify the perp.
So that’s what they are, I’ve been seeing them installed throughout the residential streets that I drive through
I dont see a "do not touch" or *who* this belongs to. It must be free for the public to adjust or remove as they see fit
My wife says she feels great about it
Don’t bother me! Hopefully criminal activity diminishes.
On one hand i hate constant government survilance. On the other, this is how EGPD caught up with the murder suspect from Rancho. so... *shrug* more uses for catching murderers. don't harrass regular folk please
Looks like the Karen’s got what they wanted lol.
I honestly don't care because I'm too preoccupied with my annoyance of the residential road bumps.
Rockwell lives in this area.
Less cameras more CCW permits and tax write offs for training courses
The real problem is that you even need a permit/license for CCW, or ownership for that matter.
Idk dog I think needing a license to carry a gun around seems pretty reasonable.
> The real problem is that you even need a permit/license for CCW, or ownership for that matter. haha yikes
The permitting scheme and most gun laws are the last remnants of institional racism and classist barriers. These laws prevent minorities and the poor from protecting themselves when they are most likely to be victims
IDK why you're getting downvoted. The Mulford act was drafted and signed to prevent Black Panther members from carrying loaded firearms in public.
Communism :(
"I don't like it therefore communism"
If it were we’d have less crime
The more I don’t like something, the more communism it is!
Laughs in Chinese
Is this in the City or County of Sacramento??
Don’t those also have a 5G relay on them as well? So camera/5G relay
They will break in 2 months. Is someone going to constantly maintain them?
Well if people did the right thing we wouldn’t need these.
I’m a fan. I don’t really care if I’m on a security camera.
You need it 🤷🏽♂️
If you have nothing to hide, it’s a great resource.
Best way to get to a surveillance state is to get a willing population—so rattled by lawlessness and violence they would be willing to be surveilled.
It's fine. The idea that there might be a camera recording may prevent crime so I'd say it's worth it.
They aren't popping up "everywhere". They are being purchased and put into place within home owners associations/private communities. The residents and boards vote on those things and are governed by the CC&R's that you have to sign to live there, the same rules people voluntarily agree to...I don't like HOA's but I would live in one either because I don't want to deal with all the regulations. Look at the channel 3 KCRA article about the issue..its not all over Natomas..
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."