Look for car theft in Denver to increase dramatically

[mspart]

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/06/27/ice-ice-baby-denver-city-council-ends-car-theft-tracking-system-to-protect-illegal-immigrants/#more-233209

I hope the whole city council gets their cars stolen.  I hope all the city cars and trucks get stolen.  This is eggregious.  The voting public will hopefully right this wrong headed decision. 

The Denver City Council has voted unanimously to shutter a highly successful anti-theft auto license plate tracking system. The system was not closed due to concerns about privacy or finances. It was shut down because Democratic members believed that ICE could use the data to deport illegals.

In May, the council refused to renew the $666,000 contract with Flock for camera monitors around 70 Denver intersections to screen for car theft. That system resulted in the recovery of 170 stolen cars and 300 arrests. It is also credited with key evidence in the investigation of hit-and-run and murder cases.

However, it could also be used to assist ICE, and that is all that matters. Councilman Kevin Flynn explained it is all about Trump’s election: “We know that it can help solve crime. But I think since maybe Jan. 20 of this year, those concerns are greatly heightened and have a new reality about them.”

Ridiculous. 

mspart

 

[mspart]

Oh and wait for insurance premiums to skyrocket.   The D's with their virtue signalling will wreck the city.

mspart

[Offthemat]

Their reasoning completely ignores the will of the law abiding citizens and is entirely abominable. 

[Caveira]

8 minutes ago, Offthemat said:

Their reasoning completely ignores the will of the law abiding citizens and is entirely abominable. 

Would jfk recognize the modern d party or roll over in his grave ?

[Offthemat]

1 minute ago, Caveira said:

Would jfk recognize the modern d party or roll over in his grave ?

He’d recognize it as the communist enterprise that it is. 

[mspart]

This is not the Democrat party and we don't know who JFK is.

mspart

[fishbane]

1 hour ago, mspart said:

The Denver City Council has voted unanimously to shutter a highly successful anti-theft auto license plate tracking system. The system was not closed due to concerns about privacy or finances. It was shut down because Democratic members believed that ICE could use the data to deport illegals.

You could argue they are doing it for the wrong reasons, but it's for the best.  Flock camera systems have always been a huge privacy concern and the reason for their removal in Denver does boil down to a "concern about concern."  It's just they finally violated privacy in a way the lawmakers finalyl cared about.  Law enforement in many areas have access to the tracking that these systems provide without a warrant making it ripe for abuse.  

https://local12.com/news/nation-world/police-chief-gets-caught-using-license-plate-cameras-to-track-his-ex-girlfriend-228-times-arrests-charges-probation-flock-safety-follow-stalk-new-boyfriend-broke-up-out-of-town-misuse

I wouldn't want these in my city regardless of whether or not it might recover my stolen car. 

[Lipdrag]

3 hours ago, mspart said:

Oh and wait for insurance premiums to skyrocket.   The D's with their virtue signalling will wreck the city.

mspart

Remember, these are the heartful people.  Quality of life, down.  Heartful.  Costs up.  Heartful.  Using data designed to catch criminals to catch criminals - heartless.  Denver will ban using fingerprints and DNA evidence soon because some criminal might be caught.

[Lipdrag]

3 hours ago, Offthemat said:

Their reasoning completely ignores the will of the law abiding citizens and is entirely abominable. 

Their reasoning is HEARTFUL.  Law abiding citizens (especially law abiding ones) be damned!!

[Lipdrag]

2 hours ago, fishbane said:

You could argue they are doing it for the wrong reasons, but it's for the best.  Flock camera systems have always been a huge privacy concern and the reason for their removal in Denver does boil down to a "concern about concern."  It's just they finally violated privacy in a way the lawmakers finalyl cared about.  Law enforement in many areas have access to the tracking that these systems provide without a warrant making it ripe for abuse.  

https://local12.com/news/nation-world/police-chief-gets-caught-using-license-plate-cameras-to-track-his-ex-girlfriend-228-times-arrests-charges-probation-flock-safety-follow-stalk-new-boyfriend-broke-up-out-of-town-misuse

I wouldn't want these in my city regardless of whether or not it might recover my stolen car. 

I agree with you on this specific technology.  And on red light cameras/speed cameras.  The other is the collecting of "metadata" from communications companies.  So, on principles of privacy and curtailing the surveillance state I agree with you. I do think we need to apply the 4th amendment much more broadly to encompass a concept of "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" that takes into account indirect but still unreasonable searches like mass surveillance and tracking.

Edited Friday at 11:30 PM by Lipdrag

[Offthemat]

1 hour ago, Lipdrag said:

Their reasoning is HEARTFUL.  Law abiding citizens (especially law abiding ones) be damned!!

I see what you’re doing there.

[ionel]

So if I'm looking for a new car Denver is the place to shop?  

[Offthemat]

On 6/27/2025 at 2:51 PM, Caveira said:

Would jfk recognize the modern d party or roll over in his grave ?

Something just reminded me that you don’t have to go back to JFK, just look at what happened to RFK Jr when he tried to be a dimocrat.  

[fishbane]

On 6/27/2025 at 7:29 PM, Lipdrag said:

I agree with you on this specific technology.  And on red light cameras/speed cameras.  The other is the collecting of "metadata" from communications companies.  So, on principles of privacy and curtailing the surveillance state I agree with you. I do think we need to apply the 4th amendment much more broadly to encompass a concept of "secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects" that takes into account indirect but still unreasonable searches like mass surveillance and tracking.

I meant to write "concern about privacy" in my original comment.  I don't like speed/red light cameras either, but those are not as bad.  One can prevent being caught up in that kind of surveillance by simply obeying the law.  When they first appeared in my area someone set one on fire.  The police were not able to use any footage from the camera to solve the crime because it only captured an image when someone was speeding.  There was nothing to review even if undamaged from the fire.

Flock cameras monitor any car that passes it and maintains a history of the comings and goings of that vehical whether or not it is speeding, flagged as stolen, or just a regular person minding thier own business following the law.  This information is shared with other flock users and can be accessed without a warrant. In some parts of the country one cannot take a drive of any significant length via the most efficient route without passing one.  Mass surveillence systems like flock can create and maintain a history of the position and travel direction of all vehicles used over a pretty wide area with surprising fidelity.  This can then be used by governemnt users for purposes that go far beyond what is mentioned in the article (locating stolen vehicles).

This is a win for the residents of Denver and all those that travel through the area.

[Lipdrag]

5 minutes ago, fishbane said:

This is a win for the residents of Denver and all those that travel through the area.

I agree on the principles of privacy and curtailing government overreach. I find no authorization in the constitution for any government to surveil the population without probable cause.  "Just looking" is a facil argument that fails under any principled scrutiny whatsoever.

[mspart]

I can see your point here fishy.   But it was a system that was used to find stolen cars and it worked well.   Now they are getting rid of it, not because finding stolen cars is no longer important, but because they want to prevent ICE from using them.    It would have been better to say what you said, we have thought about it and this appears to be an invasion of people's privacy, those who are not driving stolen cars.  

Apparently the system was to good as has been pointed out.  It caught drivers of stolen cars but could surveil everyone .   I agree that is a tough one to rationalize.  

My statement on the effect this will have on stolen cars and insurance rates stands nonetheless. 

mspart

[WrestlingRasta]

The addition of the cameras did not affect insurance rates, so I don’t see why the removal of them would.   
 

Tricky subject.   I like the idea of assisting (and the key word being assisting, not guaranteeing) in retrieving stolen cars.  I would have to look at some stats at what the retrieval rate was before and during the cameras before making any kind of opinion on how much it helps.  Generally speaking, I wouldn’t want those cameras for that assistance at the expense of the government following me around. And there’s nothing to say the only thing they did with those cameras was look when a car was stolen.   At the same time, driving these roads is a public space, not my private home.  Driving is a privilege, not a right. 
 

Tricky indeed. 

[fishbane]

I don't know that these systems reduce the number of cars that get stolen.  The data would be interesting to look at though I assume it would be provided by Flock who has an interest in selling these camera systems and representing them as useful.  I suspect where they make a difference is in recovery more than prevention.  Lower recovery might drive up insurance rates, but it may not be that significant.  Often recovered vehicles don't have much residual value.  The news reports I've seen on this credit them with involvment of 170-180 cars recovered since 2024.  Now some of those would have been recovered anyway, but at a cost of $666,000 to operate the system that's like $3700/recovery.  That might give the systems too much credit because the some would be recovered anyway, but the cameras also provided some evidence that helped solve other serious crimes.

The problem is that the intended use for the cameras by the people in the legislative body signing off on paying the bill might not match with how it is used in practice.  It would be less problematic if the system would only record the whereabouts of cars that are stolen or part of a felony and with a warrant signed by a judge.  That isn't how they get used.   Maybe the Denver police only use them for help locating cars tied to serious crimes - stolen cars, bank robberies, amber alerts, etc.  If the police choose to share their data with other flock users than any agency with a Flock system can view it without a warrant and use it how they see fit.

My brother is a police officer and he says that at work they often use these data on routine traffic stops.  If he gets to feeling like maybe the driver is transporting something illegal he might ask some questions about where they are coming from/heading to things like that.  Then when he goes back to run their driver's license he checks the license plate reader data.  If, for example, someone said they were coming from Maine heading to Florida and the systems says a flock camera in Denver scanned their plate yesterday he will take that as a sign that could be transporting something illegal and lying to throw him off.  He will then look for a reason to search the vehicle.  

It would be smart for city council to focus on the privacy concerns because at the end of the day that is the problem. I suspect whether the story focuses more on privacy vs immigration might depend more on the news outlet reporting the story.  City council members likely mentioned both.

[mspart]

I think insurance companies didn't have to worry about the amount of stolen vehicles much before the cameras went up, as the increase in stolen vehicles is a more recent thing.  With the cameras, their payout was reduced.   Without the cameras, their payout will increase.   They don't like that so rates will go up.   That's how I see it.

mspart