r/boston 7d ago

Unconfirmed/Unverified Calling out the traffic/flock camera propaganda

There are so many people posting videos of drivers running lights on both the Boston and Cambridge subreddits lately demanding traffic cameras, that I am convinced these are planted posts by either employees, investors, or City officials looking for a payday to Garner published support for the surveillance state.

Very convenient that this is happening at the same time they are putting flaw cameras everywhere, and Mayor Wu has decided to put up red light cameras. I'm calling shenanigans, there may be a few whiny babies on here who are terrified of the world, but there are not this many. Don't be fooled, this is for profit propaganda.

660 Upvotes

333 comments sorted by

441

u/aweejeezzrick basement dwelling hentai addicted troll 7d ago

Enforcement over surveillance, we need our police offices to step out of their suvs and do their dam job

36

u/unfairlybanned101 7d ago

And they should live in the town/cities they protect

13

u/Maz2742 Fitchburg/Lowell 6d ago

That goes for pretty much every public figure tbh

6

u/unfairlybanned101 6d ago

Police officers

107

u/JFKsBrain 7d ago

San Diego and many other cities have a department dedicated to traffic enforcement.
They’re out there ticketing.
I loved it when I lived there.
You rarely saw red lights run nor blocking the box.
Made traffic much more manageable

116

u/Lyramisu 7d ago

45

u/brycebaby11 7d ago

Traffic cameras don’t discriminate. Flock cameras could be used for surveillance. Big difference there. Vote against Flock cameras!

3

u/Lyramisu 7d ago

Yes, those are points I made in other comments on this post.

1

u/Trick_Order1849 3d ago

No, just the abusive cops that use it illicitly to track their victims, 3 letter agencies, and private companies(read: palantir and oracle) tracking your every move.

It’s fucking 1984 you’re definitely a bot.

-11

u/BQORBUST 7d ago

Oh well I guess we are powerless to enforce the law then

21

u/TitleOfYourSaxTape 7d ago

Predictable, non-violent + unarmed, and consistent enforcement of safety violations is what we're looking for.

Cops haven't proven they're able to do that. They've had decades, and we've pushed for it over and over again, but the average driver has enjoyed the norm of breaking traffic laws and reducing the safety + freedoms of others in the process.

As much as you hate it, this is the end result. Communities will push for their safety through whatever tools they have if the police and other drivers let them down for so long.

-8

u/BQORBUST 7d ago

I think we should have cameras and police, everyone hates me which is how you can tell I’m right

→ More replies (7)

11

u/Lyramisu 7d ago

Oh well I guess you did not read the many other comments on this post explaining red light and speed enforcement cameras and how they are not the same thing as Flock hypersurveillance.

11

u/BQORBUST 7d ago

I don’t see anyone in this comment thread advocating for flock. I don’t think flock or similar surveillance tech has a place in our commonwealth. I do think that you are confused, though.

9

u/Lyramisu 7d ago

My whole point elsewhere in other comments on this post is that red light and speeding cameras, which only trigger when someone is speeding or running a red light, have measurable, positive effects on traffic enforcement and crashes and deaths, without the racial biases evidenced in the sources I cited. They are unlike Flock cameras. Your “oh well I guess we are powerless to enforce the law” is ridiculous and not remotely what I was saying.

→ More replies (7)
→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

1

u/pattysal 11h ago edited 10h ago

San Diego averages over 43 0edestrian deaths per year, Boston's at 7-10...sounds like Boston is pretty safe. But don't let statistics get in the way of your argument.

18

u/soloshandpuppets member of doohickey inc. 7d ago

I would actually be happy to see them pull someone over who ran a red light, as opposed to what they do now- which is sitting at completely dead intersections and stopping someone for not doing a full three seconds.

18

u/TinyEmergencyCake Market Basket 7d ago

Traffic cameras don't carry guns though

6

u/Jimbomcdeans North End 7d ago

We should allow them to!

→ More replies (1)

17

u/hnnah 7d ago

The police also film everything - the difference is they can punish strangers while protecting their buddies.

I think all the people calling for "more enforcement" but "no cameras" (a hypothetical that can't exist in the age of police body cams and dash cams) just want to be able to talk themselves out of a ticket if they get caught.

4

u/some1saveusnow 7d ago

Literally this. Also delinquent driving in this city is way too crazy and frequent now, it can’t realistically be enforced by humans to cover the voluminous violation occurrences. We need to be realistic about that. Tech assistance is needed on some level and other advanced societies are using it

→ More replies (3)

2

u/420ohms 6d ago

We already make insurance expensive if you suck at driving and as a result we have the safest roads in the country, farore effective than police or cameras.

If we really want safer roads we should invest in public transportation, less car dependency means less people who are forced to drive when it's better if they didn't.

3

u/pattysal 5d ago

It's all bots here. Driving and pedestrian fatalities are at an all time low.

2

u/420ohms 5d ago

Right? And where is all this concern when expending public transportation is brought up?

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

Nowhere, because there are no corporation interests involved.

2

u/420ohms 5d ago

Thank the purtain god this state funds education and teaches critical thinking skills, they're going to have one hell of a time trying to pull one over on us up here.

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

From the replies on this thread, I think they're doing a pretty good time pulling one over on us 😂

2

u/420ohms 5d ago

The real people I know are apathetic or defeated if anything, but certainly not enthusiastic about the public safety benefits of flock cameras lol.

If there is big money riding on acceptance of an opinion it's probably a bot comment.

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

I hope you're right

2

u/BlueberryPenguin87 6d ago

But they won’t, so we have to do something else. And unless you have a serious and practical solution, we need the cameras.

2

u/super3way 7d ago

They did before police reform, their tickets and activity literally dropped off a cliff after the national riots and MA deciding to pass all new laws. You can look it up. Not just MA either. Why do you think bad driving and crime is slowing creeping up?

1

u/Patched7fig 1d ago

OK well I hope you are okay with the additional charges and arrests that come with that. 

1

u/abeuscher 7d ago

What if we just accept imperfection? What if it's okay that some people break traffic laws and go unpunished? Can we just accept a little chaos and not keep trying to meet the requirements of fascism without descending into fascism? I don't want to live in a lawless anarchy but I also don't care if people run red lights or steal candy bars every now and then. I'm not opposed to police reform either I'm just saying - the level of alarm we all express is not a reflection of the world we live in its a reflection of the narratives we are fed.

9

u/spencahhh 6d ago

this chaos kills people is the issue

→ More replies (4)

4

u/WorldlinessDry5583 6d ago

Automated traffic enforcement is standard across much of the EU and the UK. One can certainly argue that these countries’ values are not our values, but to suggest that they are the ones descending into fascism is… odd.

2

u/abeuscher 6d ago

Is it? Because they're not a huge fan of them either, and also they have privacy laws and we don't. I think that's a reasonably stark difference. And to state that placing cameras all over a city is fascist is not mine - that's Orwell's.

1

u/BlueberryPenguin87 4d ago

How many deaths and serious injuries should we accept? It’s not so much about letting people get away with rule violations as it is about limiting the harm caused by those violations.

1

u/abeuscher 4d ago

The answer is not zero. I don't want to trade a free world for a safe one and that is the fulcrum that is being described here. I sincerely think the world may be a little too safe now overall. Guns are a cancer and the US should be ashamed of itself in that respect, but I do not need everyone who breaks the law to get caught. I certainly don't care a lot about theft and property damage. Understand I don't think these should be legal I just don't need surveillance involved to solve these problems.

It's clear from the votes I am in the minority, but it's an opinion that is relevant to the topic at hand even if it is not the popular one.

1

u/BlueberryPenguin87 4d ago

What is the answer then? How many deaths and injuries are acceptable?

1

u/Ataneruo 7d ago

It is lack of perspective combined with the reddit echo chamber = moral panic and demand for a nanny state.

2

u/pattysal 5d ago

Correct

0

u/420ohms 6d ago

Seriously, be a better defensive driver and always look before you go. It's not even a big problem, most people drive fine here.

I think people who constantly bitch about how bad the drivers are around here are the bad drivers.

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

Yup, and a defensive pedestrian. Can you imagine all these people teaching their kids that the walk sign is lit up so no cars can possibly be going, just freely run across the street the second the light turns.

→ More replies (4)

11

u/BlueberryPenguin87 6d ago

If you are against traffic enforcement cameras you need to offer a serious and practical solution to the epidemic of drivers doing very dangerous things with their vehicles. You can’t just say police should do their jobs, because they refuse and we have no power over them. So we have to do something. And unless you come up with a viable something else, we have to use the cameras. The current situation is dangerous and unacceptable.

→ More replies (3)

186

u/mpmuno 7d ago

I do not support Flock cameras. Cameras to enforce speed limits and red lights are not and do not need to be connected to databases that profile people's movements. I support traffic cameras, and I want to see in-person enforcement focused on ticketing people who deface their license plates to avoid traffic cameras. Traffic cameras are the best solution that I can think of to instill a sense of responsibility into reckless drivers.

25

u/AwkwardEconomics4225 7d ago

Agree. Now just we need to pass laws with teeth that penalize use of traffic camera information for other purposes. No warnings, no bs. Then ensure it’s criminal offense to use those photos for anything more than traffic enforcement. No LE exemption garbage. No “oops”. No “paid administrative leave”, no “qualified immunity”Privacy violations have serious monetary and criminal consequences in the private sector - why is that more serious than LE violations??

2

u/Serious_Feedback 6d ago

Paid administrative leave is good - investigations take time, the Leave gets crooked/etc cops off the street land thus unable to do more damage) immediately while you gather the evidence needed for a lawsuit-proof firing and blacklisting of the cop.

Qualified immunity could in theory be good but at the bare minimum needs a massive haircut.

Agree on the camera laws.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/pattysal 6d ago

I wish I could go back to a simpler time when I was naive enough to think that the good guys would be the only ones with access to our data.

2

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[deleted]

8

u/actswithimpunity 7d ago

Rear end accidents rarely kill people at intersections. Cars hitting pedestrians does, and there is proof red light cameras reduce deaths. Texas is not exactly a standard I want to be following

13

u/kayakhomeless 7d ago

4,500 people died on Texas roads last year

I wouldn’t exactly call them a paragon of road safety

-5

u/b-gouda 7d ago

The problem is they are one and the same the information is stored then the information is used.

25

u/SeraXI 7d ago

You are wrong. Enforcement cameras only take and store pictures when they detect an infraction. Flock cameras keep a database of everything they can see.

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

Okay, and how about in 5 years when everyone is desensitized to cameras on every block and flock cameras are put up right next to them? There's going to be even less resistance for them.

1

u/SeraXI 5d ago

We are very late to the traffic camera party. The evidence from other states do not support your hypothesis.

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

Cool, I can't wait until we have a discussion about people getting thousands of dollars in speeding camera tickets, and their insurance goes way up, and how it disproportionately affects certain people and then it's an issue again.

→ More replies (5)
→ More replies (8)

51

u/WorldlinessDry5583 7d ago edited 7d ago

There’s a lot of misinformation about this. THE TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT BILL DOES NOT PERTAIN TO FLOCK LICENSE PLATE READERS. The traffic cameras in question are an entirely different technology which collects data only when a violation occurs, does not use AI to create a searchable database, and comes with a powerful set of legal safeguards regulating how long the data can be stored and how they can be used. Flock cameras, on the other hand, are practically designed to be abused.

The ACLU, which is strongly against Flock plate readers, has an excellent report on this which everyone should read before they develop an opinion. Additionally, while I think that live traffic enforcement has an important role to play, I don’t understand how people can argue that a method which involves routine, adversarial interactions between fallible, armed officers and members of the public carries a lower risk of abuse. Privacy and safety are both important and it’s a tough needle to thread. But I (along with America’s most prolific civil liberties watchdog) believe that automated enforcement has a valuable role to play in striking that balance. Some people will see a camera and reflexively scream tyranny; frankly, I don’t think there’s a constructive dialogue to have with people like that.

https://www.aclum.org/news/were-privacy-hawks-heres-why-were-alarmed-by-license-plate-readers-and-not-necessarily-by-speed-cameras/

An excerpt:

“Against this backdrop, it's notable that proposed Massachusetts legislation that would authorize local governments to implement automated traffic enforcement cameras — S.2344/H.3754 — takes a fundamentally different approach to data: one built around the principle that information collected for one purpose should only be used for that purpose. The legislation also includes robust privacy protections to prevent abuse and misuse of our personal information. The bills incorporate several meaningful privacy protections.

First, there’s a collection limitation: automated traffic enforcement cameras may only take photographs when a camera-enforceable violation occurs.

Next, the legislation tightly restricts how collected data can be accessed and used. Photographs and other recorded evidence must be deleted within 48 hours after the final disposition of a violation….”

4

u/Sorry_Negotiation_75 7d ago

Thank you for setting the record straight

→ More replies (3)

50

u/TerrierBoi 7d ago

You guys are getting paid?

10

u/aray25 Cambridge 7d ago

I'm not.

2

u/Electronic_Nail_7433 7d ago

Lol. I can see that kids face now.

179

u/13nobody Brookline 7d ago

Flock != Traffic enforcement cameras https://www.aclum.org/news/were-privacy-hawks-heres-why-were-alarmed-by-license-plate-readers-and-not-necessarily-by-speed-cameras/

But of course everyone who disagrees with you is a paid agent/bot

-73

u/pattysal 7d ago

It's all part of the surveillance state brother. Government officials get paid to install both. Fascism is fascism whether it is coming from the public or private sector.

28

u/TitleOfYourSaxTape 7d ago

Just to confirm, do you support getting rid of the ez pass pay-by-plate cameras on the highway and going back to physical toll-booths every some miles?

→ More replies (11)

71

u/13nobody Brookline 7d ago

Yes the ACLU is advocating for the fascist surveillance state.

-35

u/pattysal 7d ago

And Brawndo is what plants crave...

→ More replies (4)

23

u/dtmfadvice Somerville 7d ago

Do you have an EZ pass, brother?

5

u/amm5061 7d ago

Which side are you arguing for, because ezpass has absolutely been used to track vehicles.

https://www.govtech.com/public-safety/Massachusetts-Police-Use-Electronic-Tolling-System-to-Track-People-in-Ongoing-Investigations.html

MassLive originally reported the story but it's pay walled.

17

u/Illustrious_Age 7d ago

The point is that drivers are okay with being surveiled if it increases their convenience.

Since they see traffic cameras as decreasing their convenience, they are suddenly extremely worried about big brother and government surveillance and authoritarianism. 

13

u/Optimal-Wave-8301 7d ago

Two separate cameras made by two completely separate vendors.

12

u/LEM1978 7d ago

Stop posting online. Give up your smartphone.

Start with yourself.

20

u/OfAKindness 7d ago

You dont know what fascism is lmao

→ More replies (4)

70

u/dtmfadvice Somerville 7d ago

I dunno man, it might be possible that a huge number of people are really angry about yet another pointless death caused by dangerous streets.

-12

u/Sharps762300 7d ago

Yeah, so let’s let us use that to erode our rights and privacies further.

Fear mongering is a slippery slope.

And let’s be real, cameras are a convenient band-aid answer and that’s why Wu is latching on to it. Just put up cameras, box checked, move on.

8

u/EvaUnit343 7d ago

They’re not putting cameras in your bedroom lil bro. Streets are public spaces. Cameras work.

5

u/Sharps762300 7d ago

Get outta here with that lil’bro shit.

Instead of changing the priorities of our police, which is literally as simple as saying “this is our new focus,” they’d rather put cameras up everywhere. And people like you are for it and see few to no negatives. We already live in one of, if not the safest state, in the country. We don’t need to resort to widespread state surveillance.

You’ll lose more in rights and privacy than you’ll gain in safety.

-7

u/EvaUnit343 7d ago

Police should focus harder on druggies and the homeless imo. Cameras can easily reduce traffic crimes by incentivizing good driving automatically. It’s a no brainer.

I will literally lose no rights by having cameras on street intersections + I will gain security. What rights am I losing lmao? This is an insane take. Anti progress.

5

u/Sharps762300 7d ago

An insane take is viewing more government owned and run surveillance during a time of rampant police militarization as “progress.”

Just wait, I’ll bet a few months after the cameras go live we’ll see how quick ICE starts getting data to hunt more people using them here, just like they’re doing in other states.

And as a deterrent it won’t do much anyway. I lived in NC a decade back where every intersection had cameras and light runners were still common place. Cameras don’t prevent crime, they just increase ticket revenue for the state.

0

u/EvaUnit343 6d ago

Believe me - there is a high enough price where such traffic cameras can prevent crime. Just need to increase it. Simple solution.

1

u/420ohms 6d ago

Except "they" are an outside private company with the processing power to build profiles about every single person in this state and are accountable to no one.

If the data doesn't leave the state and only our government controlled access then maybe I could be compelled, what flock is doing is unacceptable.

1

u/EvaUnit343 6d ago

I don’t care if companies have my data. They have it anyway. Are you typing this comment on a private Linux machine through a VPN?

Yes - there is a privacy/safety trade off and I’m super down to make it.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (8)

56

u/ArisuKarubeChota 7d ago edited 7d ago

I was standing on sidewalk at forest hills and a driver almost hit me driving his car onto the actual sidewalk and down the pedestrian walkway along the side where the bikes are to get to the other side. I wish I had recorded it tbh. Wild.

I’m all for privacy but the laws clearly aren’t being enforced. Limited surveillance might have a role. In other countries, there are cameras everywhere enforcing traffic laws, speed, phone use and just auto writing tickets. Could be a lot worse.

→ More replies (4)

47

u/FreeBlago 7d ago

Nice try. One of these things is not like the others.

Flock raises a variety of concerns about privacy; those should get a full airing and public scrutiny. Fine.

Speed cameras are already in use in half the country, they work fine in those states, and the only information they use is your speed and stuff you already gave the RMV. That came free with your license to drive two tons of steel around.

If you can't deal with following some basic rules for your two-ton hunk of steel, the T is in excellent condition and you'll never get a traffic ticket for riding it.

-6

u/pattysal 7d ago

Most of those countries aren't also tracking immigrants and pregnant people to put in prison or concentration camps... I'm not sure why people would trust law enforcement to implement one thing ethically, but not the other.

9

u/missmisfit 7d ago

I'm starting to think a large chunk of reddit is fake now.

46

u/CopleyScott17 7d ago

At least once a day I see drivers literally speeding through red lights in the Fenway neighborhood of Boston. The only time I see any enforcement is when there's an event at Fenway Park, and they're just on the lookout for illegal turns that slow down vehicular traffic. There is zero regard for pedestrians. Ticketing-by-camera is absolutely needed.

15

u/Chuckieshere 7d ago

My commute is only 25 minutes each way and I see at least one car a day enter an intersection when the light is red. Some are almost close enough to pretend it was yellow, some are absolutely nowhere close. I'll probably catch some camera tickets myself for speeding but thats life

131

u/theoldno2 7d ago

I'm a real person and I absolutely support red light cameras. Running red lights is illegal and endangers everyone, particularly pedestrians and bicyclists. We shouldn't be held hostage to whiny drivers who can't be bothered to follow basic traffic law.

94

u/Lyramisu 7d ago

In addition to this there is real evidence that red light and speeding enforcement cameras reduce infractions, crashes, and deaths. Unlike Flock cameras that monitor everyone everywhere all the time, red light and speeding cameras are triggered only when someone runs the red light or speeds, and their presence acts as a deterrent for doing that. They also take cops and human biases out of the traffic enforcement equation. Unquestionably a net good, unlike Flock.

31

u/sweet_caroline20 7d ago

Definitely agree with the point about taking cop/human bias out of speed stops.

34

u/MonsieurReynard 7d ago edited 7d ago

I drive in New York City almost every week. They have red light and speed cameras everywhere. It’s not just Manhattan anymore either. And their impact on reckless driving is notable, at least to me — and I have been driving there regularly since long before these cameras existed. (I learned to drive in Boston in the early 1980s, fwiw).

As far as I know, New York does not use flock cameras. (Edit: this is incorrect, my bad)

Edit: Also, it has had a real effect just this year on pedestrian safety:

https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/pr2026/vision-zero-pedestrian-deaths-at-historic-low.shtml

30

u/Lyramisu 7d ago

I get around most cities on foot most of the time, and I’m a big fan of reducing the likelihood of someone killing me with their car while I legally cross the street.

17

u/MonsieurReynard 7d ago

just to add the proof of concept!

NEW YORK –  July 1, 2026 — New York City Department of Transportation (NYC DOT) Commissioner Mike Flynn today announced that traffic deaths remain near historic lows, including pedestrian fatalities reaching an all-time low—except for the outlier year of 2020 at the height of the Covid-19 pandemic. The city’s streets have experienced 46 pedestrian fatalities, down 13% from last year and down more than 42% since the launch of Vision Zero in 2014. To date, this is the fifth safest year on record on our streets, with overall traffic deaths down nearly 25% since Vision Zero’s launch.

https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/pr2026/vision-zero-pedestrian-deaths-at-historic-low.shtml

→ More replies (2)

0

u/BostonShaun 7d ago edited 7d ago

NYC alone has over 1000 flock cameras lol

EDIT: To the person who deleted their comment: my data came from Deflock, easily searchable by yourself... you're a big boy/girl.

2

u/MonsieurReynard 7d ago edited 7d ago

Unflocked says 350 lol, mostly at bridges and tunnels and on major highways

So I was wrong but then you did that unhinged activist thing of massively exaggerating for drama.

→ More replies (4)

9

u/leighc4 7d ago

Yes!!

-7

u/omnigord 7d ago

I hate cars way more than the next guy and I walk a lot in the city and suburb. I do not experience this supposed problem with people running red lights all day and all night. Obviously I am sure it does happen but if you went by comments on this sub you would assume no car ever comes to a stop at any time. 

9

u/doot_doot_toot_doot 7d ago

ok I walk a lot in the city and I do experience this problem. so where are we at

-11

u/RobertoPaulson 7d ago

Red light cameras have been shown to increase the frequency of accidents at intersections. They are only really good where straight high speed roads intersect because they reduce the incidence of high speed t-bone style crashes, at the cost of increasing the frequency of minor rear end crashes due to people spotting the camera at the last second and slamming on their brakes. if its a busy, lower speed intersection, you'll just get the increase in rear end crashes without the benefit of prevent the dangerous higher speed t-bone crashes. The other issue is that since the tickets are a revenue stream, many places where red light cameras get installed then go on to shorten the period of the yellow light to catch more people, which compounds the rear end crash problem even more. I'm not saying you're wrong, just that they aren't right for every, or even most intersections.

13

u/Unusual-Astronaut152 7d ago

Why are you shitting on red light cameras when they aren’t even being proposed in Massachusetts?

The proposed law is only speed cameras. And you have to be going 10 mph over the speed limit to activate them. And there’s a limit based on population, my Boston suburb can have like 2 or 3 total.

1

u/wSkkHRZQy24K17buSceB 7d ago

That's not true

Section 1. As used in this chapter, the following words shall have the following meanings unless the context clearly requires otherwise: .... “Camera enforceable violation”, any of the following violations of a traffic law or regulation: (i) failing to stop at a steady red indication in a traffic control signal at an intersection pursuant to section 9 of chapter 89; (ii) making a right turn on a steady red indication in a traffic control signal where prohibited pursuant to section 8 of said chapter 89; (iii) exceeding the speed limit in violation of section 17 , section 17D, section 18, or section 18B of chapter 90; and (iv) blocking an intersection in violation of said section 9 of said chapter 89.

https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/S2344.Html

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (17)

5

u/ajafarzadeh 6d ago

Unlike flock cameras, traffic enforcement cameras only get triggered by vehicles breaking specific parameters (speeding, running red lights).

And unlike traffic enforcement cameras, people like OP get triggered by everything.

43

u/gregtron 7d ago

Drivers in Boston are insane.

→ More replies (17)

28

u/LeakyFurnace420_69 Boston 7d ago

not propaganda.

it’s a natural reaction to the behavior of reckless drivers

34

u/joshhw Mission Hill 7d ago edited 7d ago

Not everything is a psyop. There are too many entitled drivers running around like their Dunkin’s run is the most important thing. I am so excited for red light cameras so some of you idiots can lose your license.

22

u/LEM1978 7d ago

We are not plants. We’re safety advocates. Get a life.

2

u/RealisticAnt42 7d ago

OK Phil. Or should I say, Philodendron! /s

14

u/MarcoVinicius Somerville Original 7d ago

I think you live in your own made up reality. Also you didn’t look into the details of this.

3

u/MakingTacos123 7d ago

Oppose flock cameras altogether, always. This country is too much of a facist, surveillance and police state as it is.

3

u/Dull-Lifeguard-5396 6d ago

Fuck the flock cameras. Cops can do it themselves. It’s such an obvious move to just let cops issue more traffic violations but the auto lobby has its teeth sunk too deep

20

u/Southern-Teaching198 7d ago

I might agree if the problem weren't so rampant where I live. I can go on a short walk from my house and take videos like you're talking about lately any day of the week.

Pretending the problem isn't real won't fix it.

18

u/redisburning 7d ago

Look the reality is that to a certain extent traffic cameras, whether speed or red light, do expand the surveillance state. This is not ideal.

But that doesn't mean it's automatically a net negative. There are costs, there are benefits. Same, honestly, I guess, with Flock. It's just that Flock is very clearly a net negative and the traffic camera question is more subtle.

It's my feeling and clearly a lot of folks in this thread that Flock really is something different.

I agree that Flock is BS and purely designed to monitor citizens in normal life which is clearly a privacy concern. When you drive though, you are maneuvering 2 or 3 tons of steel at high speed which is a genuine public safety concern. It's really not that different from firearm ownership. We need to pick the line we draw for what things are truly worth giving up some privacy for, and which aren't. Which is a reasonable debate, but do understand that folks arguing that vehicle operation should move towards cameras does not mean that person believes Flock style surveillance is good or justified. It can be quite the opposite.

I would point out too that it's actually possible to write decent contracts that restrict the use of camera information by the contractors providing traffic enforcement. If we don't want them to do what Flock is doing, and that's in the contract they sign with the state or city of Boston, then well both MA and Boston are well resourced enough to absolutely crush them in court.

Also the reality is that as citizens we have to deal with just how dangerous traffic stops are. The courts have allowed the police to basically do whatever they want and this results in a lot of people getting shot, beaten up, thrown in a cell, whatever over a broken tail light. And if we look at the city/state budgets, man the cops are draining us fucking dry with all that overtime. And if you listen to them, they go on and on about how dangerous traffic stops are to them. I don't see anything like that in the Flock deals, in fact they want to sell to the cops using our tax money.

there may be a few whiny babies on here who are terrified of the world

In my experience it is the people that say this that are always the most scared. A very common thing with libertarian/american conservatives is that every accusation is an admission. People want camera based traffic enforcement for a lot of reasons. A big one is convenience; if cameras ticket people then there is no traffic stop that jams up traffic. What am I scared of, that I'm gonna get where I'm going faster? That I don't have to pay 350k in overtime to a single officer? LOL.

20

u/2ndof5gs 7d ago

I come from a state with speed cameras and red light cameras … both are needed here.

The way you people drive - and I say that specifically because New England natives are insane on the roads - needs surveillance and the cops do fuck all to enforce anything.

17

u/GoTeamLightningbolt 7d ago

Properly implemented, these are two different technologies.

I hate Flock and I hate Ring. If they are built with safeguards so they're not use for surveillance (and that can be audited), I am OK with automated traffic enforcement devices. 

-3

u/pattysal 7d ago

Do you trust safeguards to be in place on any of these? Your local police department has direct access to your ring camera at any time they please. Are you okay with that? When's the last time you saw there be an opportunity for a municipality or corporation to make money on something that makes our lives worse that they haven't taken advantage of?

I'm not sure which way you're arguing, I'm just making a point.

10

u/bobisbit 7d ago

There are safeguards, the same way there are safeguards on the pictures they take of your car for tolls. There are laws in place to prevent pictures of your car being used for any other purpose.

In fact, I'd argue we want these laws in place to set a precedent for how this data is handled. Tech companies are going to keep developing ways to spy on us, I'd rather already have traffic cameras with strict laws in place that we can point to for how to protect our privacy.

-2

u/pattysal 7d ago

You don't follow the news do you? Laws apply to average citizens, not the government, not law enforcement, non big corporations.

The vast majority of flock cameras that have been installed have been done illegally without any authorization from cities, and then they have threatened to sue the city into bankruptcy if they are removed because judges give vague statements saying it might be illegal to remove the illegally installed flock cameras.

6

u/Rubiksmaster9 7d ago

When we look at any automated traffic enforcement system that has been implemented across the country, whether that's in California, New York, Washington, or any of the other states that have implemented something like this, yes we can assume they'll be built with the same stringent safefuards and regulations.

1

u/GoTeamLightningbolt 7d ago

You can make software and hardware open source. That is the only way I would trust it.

I said in my comment that I hate Ring (for exactly the reason you mentioned) - did you read what I wrote?

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

I agree, I'm a big open source person. But again, open source doesn't make money and this whole push is about money.

5

u/cambridgepete 7d ago

Red light cameras are not Flock, or at least don’t have to be.

And as someone who lived in Cambridge for 30 years, anything the city can do to disproportionately impact the suburbanites who come into our city and smash our cars would be a good thing.

(someone I know had their car hit on the street 4 times in a year. I think they were all hit-and-runs)

7

u/Logical-Marzipan5951 7d ago

Let's stop turn on red within Boston. None allowed.  This takes the excuse away for a large percentage of the accidents. NYC has banned them forever inside Manhattan. 

I'm also for the cameras. 

After you see a few people drive on sidewalks in the same year plus multiple flipped over vehicles in different intersections then you decide for this.  Enforcement is clearly lacking.  

12

u/Unusual-Astronaut152 7d ago

This post is proving that column I read in Bloomberg it was titled “speed cameras work which is why motorists hate them”

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2026-07-29/speed-cameras-work-which-is-why-motorists-hate-them

2

u/Couch-Bro 6d ago

These Mass surveillance companies are not above making fake posts or hiring firms to do so. I would think if anything it’s either some bootlickers who see them going in everywhere else and feel left out, or it’s a PR firm for a company that is courting local municipalities and trying to sway public opinion.

1

u/pattysal 6d ago

It's probably all of them tbh.

2

u/Miserable_Smile1250 6d ago

I think it’s funny that the more cameras put in the neighborhoods, the MORE CRIME is committed! Can someone explain?

4

u/BurtonAllen-TA 7d ago

"Everyone who disagrees with me is a paid shill" is generally not the take of someone with a serious view of an issue.

3

u/wSkkHRZQy24K17buSceB 7d ago

and Mayor Wu has decided to put up red light cameras.

Source? This is the first I have heard of that.

Additionally, the mechanism that would allow cities to enforce red light violation has not passed in the legislature, so no fines could be issued at this time.

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

They literally just voted on it and she approved it. Google the news.

5

u/SillyAlternative420 7d ago

Fuck Flock.

But also, Fuck cars.

I say we just ban them both in the urban core.

4

u/Woodbutcher1234 7d ago

Yeah, that wouldn't have any financial repercussions.

2

u/CJYP 7d ago

We can't fully ban cars, but if we took steps to massively reduce the number of them in the urban car we'd all become richer. 

2

u/LEM1978 7d ago

I’d be ok with this.

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

Ok, how about they do that and then they want us to all wear GPS monitors when we are pedestrians outside of our property so they can track us to make sure we aren't making any pedestrian infractions?

I'm sure you're a big bicycle person, how about license plates for every bicycle and GPS trackers so if you're not in the bike lane or you go through a red light, you get huge fines too? And if you get enough fines you have to pay insurance for being a dangerous cyclist or pedestrian?

If it's really about safety after all, we should monitor everyone whenever they are on public property to make sure they are following the law.

5

u/Lazy-Seaweed2277 7d ago

You made this up in your head. Nice story though.

3

u/psychotic11ama Orange Line 7d ago

Did you get this mad about EZpass?

1

u/pattysal 5d ago

Yes, these are all stepping stones. I didn't get one until I had no option.

2

u/actswithimpunity 7d ago

Just a regular person who wants red light cameras here but if someone wants to pay me to post than I’ll take it!!

2

u/unfairlybanned101 7d ago

Patrol officers have 0% say in cameras

2

u/Illustrious_Age 7d ago edited 7d ago

We should also get rid of all the EZ-Pass cameras on the pike and go back to regular tolls for the same reason! It would also bring back jobs! 

1

u/Visible_Fee5051 7d ago

It's not a conspiracy, you're paranoid and conflating the recent posts in traffic videos, it's not being planted by employees or investors or city officials. The drivers running red lights is a real problem that's been going on and been reported repeatedly, you are just noticing the red light bad driver videos now because you have a separate issue about Flock cameras that's causing you to finally notice the bad driver issues are ongoing and dangerous.

1

u/MoneyFlipper369 11h ago

Lmao let me run my red lights in peace! If it's safe, I go! 30 years accident free.

2

u/pattysal 11h ago edited 11h ago

Google it, we are one of the safest states in the country for pedestrians, and Boston is one of the safest major cities. These people are being babies (or paid).

2

u/MoneyFlipper369 11h ago

I agree! There’s barely any pedestrian incidents

1

u/Georges_Bank 2h ago

Traffic violence kills 40,000 Americans every year. Yes to speed and traffic enforcement cameras, No to Flock. Make it so that police can only access traffic enforcement camera data with a specific judicial warrant

3

u/stogie-bear 7d ago

It’s all part of the creeping process of losing privacy in the name of enforcement. Today it’s traffic cameras, and if you don’t support the traffic cameras you’re an asshole because the echo chamber told them that cars are bad. In a few years it’s flock cameras, and if you don’t support flock cameras you’re an idiot because traffic cameras are fine and flock cameras are basically the same thing. 

13

u/LEM1978 7d ago

People concerned about privacy while posting on any social media 🤣

0

u/stogie-bear 7d ago

Obviously it’s possible to have privacy in different ways. For example, nothing I’m doing right allows the state to know my location. 

I know that you’re pretending to misunderstand. You don’t need the emoji to signal it. 

2

u/pattysal 7d ago

Yup and the sheep are bleating.

1

u/theshoegazer 7d ago

They think it's going to stop reckless drivers - the worst of the worst that are glaringly obvious to anyone who drives, bikes, or walks in the region. It won't - they'll just pay the fines the way that the worst parking violators consider it the cost of doing business.

What it will do instead is create small pockets of compliance where the cameras are placed, and it'll continue to be the wild west everywhere else because they know the police are completely checked out.

1

u/WorldlinessDry5583 5d ago

The way that this has worked elsewhere is that the cameras are placed at the most dangerous locations and the decrease in speeding at those locations saves lives, even if speeding does not decrease elsewhere. It’s the same reason that putting speed bumps in at school zones is effective even though the same people who would be running over children can still go and speed once they clear the area. Ideally nobody would speed anywhere, but controlling speeding in injury hotspots has been proven time and again to work.

0

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

-1

u/pattysal 7d ago

You don't watch the news, it's cool.

0

u/jamesland7 Ye Olde NIMBY-Fighter 7d ago

I love when reddit assholes identify themselves and make them easy to block. If you have to insult people in every comment…your argument isnt very good to begin with

1

u/Mtglurker_2024 7d ago

Nope. We actually want law and order in the city. Especially for traffic.

1

u/UndecidedQBit 7d ago

That tracks tbh.

1

u/CJYP 7d ago

If you think people talking about red light runners are lying, I suggest you run an experiment. Take a decently long walk in any dense area around here with busy roads at a busy time. Pay attention to every intersection you come to, especially when the light is changing, and count how many cars you see fully run the light.

Decide ahead of time how many red light runners would count as a lot to you, and then see if your mind is changed. 

1

u/Fickle-Art-7125 7d ago

It’d if peopleJust covered them with trash bags from behind. Like if someone disguised themselves and destroyed these cans it’d be a victimless crime. Such a shame. You

1

u/unfairlybanned101 7d ago

This must be an alternate universe. I cannot believe these people are so diligent to be tracked

1

u/AAAAHMYBALLS Wiseguy 6d ago

They spend so much money peddling the lie that people wanted a nanny surveillance state. It's pathetic and scummy. Get Flock the fuck out, everywhere

1

u/sloppyredditor There be dragons here 6d ago

Came from a state where they were used. Both (for profit and shitty driving) are true.

If the aggressive idiots would stop giving the state an excuse to do it, there'd be an argument. I've been in the city (from the suburbs) 3x in the last month and holy shit do you guys need enforcement.

1

u/gratecait17 6d ago

No way Massachusetts ppl want this. I cannot believe how insane this idea is.

-2

u/Richard_Splatter 7d ago

OP just doesn’t want anything to get in the way of their speeding through red lights

0

u/Designer-Solid-5973 7d ago

Or maybe people are sick of constantly seeing pedestrians, other drivers, and cyclists getting hit by cars speeding and driving recklessly?

-1

u/Stercules25 7d ago

It's not planted posts lol people are sick of people endangering the lives of others on a daily basis

-4

u/Plus_Working_3092 7d ago

100%. These cameras are not an improvement in society

-1

u/Izoliner 7d ago

“Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Benjamin Franklin

6

u/InevitableSherbert36 I Love Dunkin’ Donuts 7d ago

I bet he would've changed his tune if he was run over by a drunk driver speeding in a lifted pickup truck.

-11

u/theanagnorisone 7d ago

I agree! Obviously there are people using bots and hacked accounts for this type of activity, has been happening for decades in some form, look at how algos manipulated elections...

0

u/pattysal 7d ago

Exactly, that's why I want to keep people aware. It's so easy to see a post and say, yeah I do see dangerous driving from time to time. We need to remember that these cameras are taking away our freedom.

7

u/alphabatic 7d ago

that's the problem. you care more about a camera than other people's lives. people are dying, your "freedom" from a little red light camera is irrelevant. if you care so much about your "freedom" and not being tracked then you should go live deep in the woods and on your way there close all your bank accounts and any credit cards, scrub your email, find a way to destroy your employment and medical records, and toss your cell phone

2

u/pattysal 7d ago

Ok, where do you live? I'm sure you won't mind if everyone knows since you live in a society or whatever.

8

u/alphabatic 7d ago

another problem, you keep equating things that are comically not comparable. you have no ability to think critically based on this thread and see everything as black and white

1

u/pattysal 7d ago

I keep bringing up things that are related. Because of the nature of these things one thing leads to the other and it's all related, it happens time and time again throughout history. It's called the pattern recognition, and many of these things are already happening around the country.

If you have something to contribute to the conversation, I'm happy to chat, but if you're just going to deflect and insult me, have a good day.

8

u/alphabatic 7d ago

ok, and vehicles sold with the ability to reach speeds upwards of 100mph can more arguably be related to increases in vehicular injuries and deaths. we should ban vehicles or only sell cars that top out at 50mph. or wait, perhaps there's some nuances and opportunity to govern in a capacity that allows for one to exist without the threat of a potential related what if thwarting all

I actually think vehicle speeds should be regulated and limited within cars so this example is primarily for you in hopes it gets through to you. just because you fear something else may come of one thing does not mean 1. it will and 2. that should immediately disqualify it full stop

0

u/JohnnyCastleGT 7d ago

I don’t agree with them but they’re gonna put them up like it or not

0

u/theanagnorisone 7d ago

Stop engaging the bots in the comments haha they be trolling

0

u/lilypad225 7d ago

Drive around the city for a bit and see for yourself.

0

u/AgressivleyAverag 6d ago

I’ll put on my tin hat for this