• Flying Squid
      link
      13
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      I don’t know, this sounds like what they do in London.

      Edit: I’m not saying that’s a good thing, I’m saying it didn’t get rid of cameras. It increased their numbers vastly.

        • Flying Squid
          link
          124 months ago

          I don’t think they have access to private cameras, but why would they need them when there are government cameras literally everywhere? I don’t know if you’ve been to London, but there are cameras on virtually every light pole. There are literally tens of thousands of government surveillance cameras in the UK.

          This is not an unusual sight:

          If they can’t access private cameras, they will add so many public ones that they aren’t necessary. It’s a bigger problem than just access to private cameras.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            34 months ago

            I’m not actually against public security cameras. I think London is a bit much, but hey—they caught that crime.

  • @Bell
    cake
    link
    84 months ago

    I read this and think: must be cheaper than setting up their own cameras at every corner

  • brianorca
    link
    6
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    So Ring shuts down their free access, not even two months ago, and they want to force it again somehow? Without a warrant?

    Correction: this is an article from before Ring changed the policy.

  • @harderian729
    link
    -474 months ago

    I honestly don’t see why anyone would want to be an LA cop.

    It’s harder than being a cop pretty much anywhere else and everyone hates you, even the people you’re trying to protect.

    I would just say the city can burn if they love crime so much, which they clearly do.