They just need the news stories to impart doubt. Doesn't matter if they aren't convicted.
Shit, they don't even really need to do it. They just need the news to say they are.
They just need the news stories to impart doubt. Doesn't matter if they aren't convicted.
Shit, they don't even really need to do it. They just need the news to say they are.
Using force against individual cameras is not going to be succesful in the long run. It's like punching Nazis in the street... sure, it looks and feels good, but you're not hurting the people who benefit from having them around. They are laughing all the way to the bank.
As a 3D printing enthusiast, I forever wish tangled filament and nozzle clogs to befall upon the cops who make these decoys.
Couldn't they just "swoop in" on any camera? It's not like the decoy looks so much more inviting to destroy.
If they’re fake, how do they know if/when people are tampering with them?
It's a trap, they're watching them.
So they can charge them with vandalising a fake piece made of plastic?
It's still a real physical object being intentionally broken by someone that doesn't own it.
Keep on mind, I'm absolutely NOT defending it, I'm just explaining the logic.
I understand, but the value of the destroyed ‘object’ is ridiculous so the penalty has to be minimal.
Edit:
Oh, and what if the ‘culprit’ just covers the fake camera?
all 20 comments