Best Of All...

...it's Dunwoody!

 

But Is It Really Warranted?

The law is a funny thing. There's laws. There's the constitution. There are courts. There are judges. There are processes. Many of these are intended to protect us. From the government. Some work. Some don't. In many cases we are being protected from the police, from heavy-handed law enforcement. Many folks today are concerned about a ubiquitous, pervasive surveillance state. 

But is it? Is it a surveillance state? Flock's acolytes would say thee nay. They claim that their extensive hordes of cameras, their exhaustive data collection and processing is not surveillance, it is observation. You know, exactly like a cop standing on the sidewalk, taking down license plate numbers. An objective observer would see this for what it is. Bullshit. But, is it surveillance? 

Legally, probably not. There is some merit, legally, to the notion that this is simply watching folks who have entered public areas, shedding any expectation of privacy. Then it gets tricky, because we're a quarter  of the way through the 21st century. Past the Information Age. Filled with Digital Natives. And, the law, the Supreme Court, has caught up. There are precedents around Digital Tracking, and warrants are required to access records. Almost as if you have an expectation of privacy in your own person. And this includes geofencing. Geofencing is arguably exactly what that flock o' cameras, and the information collection behind it are doing. 

It won't be long before this is argued. In court. Before a judge. Maybe even the Supreme Court, and if it makes it that far precedent suggest SCOTUS will not see this extensive data gathering as the legal equivalent of a cop with a pencil and pad. Maybe it is time for state and local governments to step up. Maybe they should establish requirements for a warrant, even an administrative warrant, to perform Digital Tracking. As it turns out, the government does not have a Constitutional right to surveil us. 

Your Childhood Is Illegal

If you are pushing forty or are older, the childhood you enjoyed, the childhood that made you the adult you've become has been outlawed. You probably played. With other children. Without adult supervision. 

Then came molester vans.

Parents' paranoia went through the roof. No more free play. No more unsupervised anything. In the real world, parents became hyper-vigilant and unarguably over-protective.

Then came smart phones hosting social media. Irony set in. These helicopter parents allowed their little darlings unfettered, unsupervised access to the anything and everything on the internet in their little hands. Swipe at will. How could these same vigilant parents become so laissez faire?

Does it even matter?

Somebody thinks so. Seems evolution is a real thing, and we evolved to develop as humans by way of human interaction. As children. Often with other children. Exclusively. A necessary playhouse with no parents allowed.

But we've made that illegal. Right here in Georgia. A mother, in Mineral Bluff, is potentially facing a year in jail because her 11 year old son was out and about and decided to go to a nearby store. Less than a mile away. Some random busybody dropped a dime on the sheriff, who intervened with the full force of the law. We don't know anything about the busybody or if there is a backstory there. Never will. What we do know is that in your day an 11 year old was baby sitting neighborhood kids but now would not be allowed to walk to and from a neighbor's house.

This is beyond nanny state.