Security cameras are generally Miguel’s topic of interest (and I’d love his take), but this is more about the degree to which the anti-cop Left wants to facilitate crime.

Make no mistake, that is their goal.

You are a bigot for your white flight to the suburbs, so they are doing everything they can to ruin your community.

From Wired:

Why We Don’t Recommend Ring Cameras
They’re affordable and ubiquitous, but homeowners shouldn’t be able to act as vigilantes.

I’m going to go out on a limb and say that they have no idea what a vigilante is.

MOST OF THE time, product testing is pretty simple. If a router is better and more feature-full than another with a similar price, then you give it a better score and move on with your day. However, we occasionally end up with products that can be dangerous to you, or to society in general, which we believe to be the case with Amazon-owned Ring and its relationship with law enforcement.

When you set up a Ring camera, you are automatically enrolled in the Neighbors service. (You can go into the Ring app’s settings and toggle off the Neighbors feed integration and notifications, but the onus is on you.) Neighbors, which is also a stand-alone app, shows you an activity feed from all nearby Ring camera owners, with posts about found dogs, stolen hoses, and a Safety Report that shows how many calls for service—violent or nonviolent—were made in the past week. It also provides an outlet for public safety agencies, like local police and fire departments, to broadcast information widely.

But it also allows Ring owners to send videos they’ve captured with their Ring video doorbell cameras and outdoor security cameras to law enforcement. This is a feature unique to Ring—even Nextdoor removed its Forward to Police feature in 2020, which allowed Nextdoor users to forward their own safety posts to local law enforcement agencies. If a crime has been committed, law enforcement should obtain a warrant to access civilian video footage.

See, if your Ring camera catches a crime on video, be it a break-in at your home or your neighbor’s home, Ring will send that video evidence to law enforcement.

That’s bad because the cops are bad.  The last thing society needs is for the cops to arrest the right people for committing crimes in middle-class neighborhoods.

Multiple members of WIRED’s Gear team have spoken to Ring over the years about this feature. The company has been clear it’s what customers want, even though there’s no evidence that more video surveillance footage keeps communities safer. Instead, Neighbors increases the possibility of racial profiling. It makes it easier for both private citizens and law enforcement agencies to target certain groups for suspicion of crime based on skin color, ethnicity, religion, or country of origin.

And there you have it, it’s racist.

This is literally the opposite of profiling.  The HD video captures the actual criminals on video.

But you might notice something about those criminals (wink, wink) and that’s double plus ungood.  You might have a wrong think about the evidence your Ring video doorbell captured.

What you need is a video camera system that can’t talk to the police.

If fact, what it needs to do is have facial recognition technology that automatically erases any recording of black people, and report you if there aren’t enough black people in your neighborhood.

Your security system really should be used against you, you bigot, to adjust your social credit score for living in a presumably white, middle-class neighborhood.

The Left doesn’t care about your safety or the safety of your community.  It cares about the safety of criminals.

You can’t have a gun to defend yourself and you can’t have a video security system that talks go the cops.  You just have to accept being the victim of a crime.  That’s social justice.

Spread the love

By J. Kb

9 thoughts on “Anti-cop Leftists go after your home security cameras”
  1. My issue with Ring is that it can be accessed by LE without your consent or knowledge. If that isn’t true, let me know.

    My system is closed.

    1. Came down here to say, I have nothing against home security cameras, but they and the associated recordings should be under the sole control of the homeowner.
      What did you go with, system-wise? I am still dithering about what to do. Say what I will about them, I have to admit the ease of Ring installation, and its ilk, is quite attractive.

      1. @it’s just Boris: I went with a hard-wired Swann 8 camera system. Our house didn’t like the wireless system. I do have an app on my phone that let’s me view when away. The app needs to be linked with the hard drive. As far as I know, it can’t be accessed without that step (but who knows what the NSA can do).

        I also have a hard-wired monitor at my desk that shows the main outside cameras. I’m pretty happy with it.

    2. That, plus it requires a connection to a server not under my control, requires an active subscription to function, and is a mass-produced mystery device connected to the home network, inside the firewall. (Yeah, I don’t trust Internet Things. I really don’t trust them when they’re popular enough to be a big inviting target for hackers.)

  2. If a crime has been committed, law enforcement should obtain a warrant to access civilian video footage.
    Not if you send it voluntarily.

    1. Pretty much. But it should still be your choice, unless you deliberately opt-in to volunteer any- and everything recorded.

  3. Remember when BLM demanded the police all wear cameras to prevent ‘profiling’ then did a 180 pivot when the cameras showed things they didn’t like, saying cameras were encouraging profiling?

  4. After any black is shot by a white cop, there is an overwhelming cry for all cops to wear body cams.
    Then the bodycams show the shoots are all justified. And, suddenly, it is racist to wear body cams.
    In other words, there is no satisfying the children, err… I mean leftists.

Comments are closed.