- 38 Posts
- 51 Comments
Ring doorbell cameras announced a partnership with Flock, which in turn has already been sharing information with ICE.
“Law enforcement agencies using Flock software can now issue Ring footage requests specifying location, timeframe, and case details, a move first reported by TechCrunch.”
https://hrnews1.substack.com/p/ring-cameras-join-flock-and-amazon
Ring doorbell cameras announced a partnership with Flock, which in turn has already been sharing information with ICE.
“Law enforcement agencies using Flock software can now issue Ring footage requests specifying location, timeframe, and case details, a move first reported by TechCrunch.”
https://hrnews1.substack.com/p/ring-cameras-join-flock-and-amazon
Ring doorbell cameras announced a partnership with Flock, which in turn has already been sharing information with ICE.
“Law enforcement agencies using Flock software can now issue Ring footage requests specifying location, timeframe, and case details, a move first reported by TechCrunch.”
https://hrnews1.substack.com/p/ring-cameras-join-flock-and-amazon
4·13 days agoStealing from a comment on the cross-post (JoMiran@lemmy.ml)
deleted by creator
Yup, so they were against putting a safeguard that would clarify that ICE cannot deport US citizens
More than two murders this year. Only those two got recorded by passerby
Other deaths:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/28/deaths-ice-2026-
Oh yes, I changed the title to reflect the truth now
But it is alarming why they would do that in the first place. Why would they be against prohibiting the deportation of U.S. citizens in the new bill?
It seems like the government is just following the Third Reich’s book on how to slowly but surely get rid of a part of the population
Here is a comment from that post on Reddit:
Just a reminder: before the"Final Solution" Hitler wanted to deport the Jews elsewhere. They would be German citizens, born in Germany, and ancestors all German, and they would still be deported. Then comes the idea, “why deport them when you can just execute them?”
Yup :(
Also there is a theory that due to this incident, the border patrol agents had a premeditated intention of conflicting with him
Which is worse? The wolf who cries before eating the lamb or the wolf who does not.
– Leo Tolstoy
If an unmarked vehicle showed up to his neighborhood with unidentifiable, masked agents, who were abducting his neighbors, and beating up people on the street, the least he could do is mark the vehicle by breaking its tail light
I saw that video, can also link it here. However, personally, I still remain unsure :(
I’ll copy paste my comment I made there
“It does sound convincing. From Angle 6 (on crimesofice.org) you can also see the officer who would later murder the victim flinch after the first shot, which would be weird if he was the one who fired it. However, I am still unsure, the videos don’t show that much detail to see whether the ICE agent in the gray jacket fired first or not :(”
Yup. I also tried to create an account to post to a couple of subreddits related to ICE, but got shadow-banned after one post. When I appealed, they fully banned me :/
4·17 days agoIt does sound convincing. From Angle 6 (on crimesofice.org) you can also see the officer who would later murder the victim flinch after the first shot, which would be weird if he was the one who fired it. However, I am still unsure, the videos don’t show that much detail to see whether the ICE agent in the gray jacket fired first or not :(
Thank you so much, you did an amazing job! I just uploaded the video to the website, and put the link of this post as the source. Let me know if you want me to change the source to “Anonymous” instead.
the large “FEDERAL OFFICER” badge on the vest :)
According to Ring’s policy, they state that they ask for user’s permission to get the footage. However, as the article mentions (but fails to provide the source actually) the Ring cameras have provided footage to law enforcement without a warrant or user’s consent 11 times in 2022. Therefore while on paper, they are supposed to ask the user, there were already times when this was completely ignored, and could mean that the same could happen in the future.
The Intercept article about it (source that this article failed to include):
https://theintercept.com/2022/07/13/amazon-ring-camera-footage-police-ed-markey/
‘Although Ring publicizes its policy of handing over camera footage only if the owner agrees — or if judge signs a search warrant — the company says it also reserves the right to supply police with footage in “emergencies,” defined broadly as “cases involving imminent danger of death or serious physical injury to any person.” Markey had also asked Amazon to clarify what exactly constitutes such an “emergency situation,” and how many times audiovisual surveillance data has been provided under such circumstances. Amazon declined to elaborate on how it defines these emergencies beyond “imminent danger of death or serious physical injury,” stating only that “Ring makes a good-faith determination whether the request meets the well-known standard.” Huseman [Amazon’s vice president of public policy] noted that it has complied with 11 emergency requests this year alone but did not provide details as to what the cases or Ring’s “good-faith determination” entailed.’
Also there is a NY Times article about it:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/28/business/amazon-ring-doorbell-camera-police.html
“In the letter, Amazon’s vice president of public policy, Brian Huseman, also said that Amazon had shared Ring footage with law enforcement 11 times in 2022 using a process that does not require the user’s consent.”