Basically jury nullification
https://futurism.com/future-society/grand-jury-ohio-flock-al...
Whereas what you're thinking of is "we the jury think the defendant did, indeed, break the law. But we think the law sucks, so 'not guilty'."
It sounds like the police and district attorney [0] are playing fast and loose with the charges, blending issues of intent (to harm an expensive camera) versus fact (not actually causing much damage.)
[0] AFAICT this is Oviedo, Florida, part of Seminole County, so part of the 18th judicial circuit and therefore the prosecutor who approved these charges is William Scheiner.
IANAL, but for example the article says they're charging him with real (not attempted) criminal mischief over $1,000. Looking it up [0] that reads as requiring a threshold of actual damage in dollars.
It's as if someone was charged with real (not attempted) first-degree murder despite the "murdered" person walking around totally unharmed. That'd be nonsense, right? We'd at least be asking what kind of brain-damage caused the prosecutor to do that instead of lowering it to "attempted murder".
There's different section [1] about attempts in a very general sense, but even then it's not clear how the math works when it was a setup and real assets were never in danger.
[0] https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Disp...
[1] https://www.leg.state.fl.us/statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Disp...
In this case they might need to prove that the man did not know the camera was a decoy, otherwise it's just misdemeanor vandalism or less. Proving a negative in a criminal case is hard and when it's about a person's mental state it might be literally impossible. We'll see.
This is a device that tracks, stalks, and investigates individuals without their consent. Additionally, these are contracts that were entered into and that are forced upon people. People's resistance to these have been punished aggressively. (From the video of the public council meetings I've seen).
In addition these devices are setup to enforce state laws outside of where the law is relivant at. (I.e. a woman has been tracked outside of the state to evaluate compliance with abortion law in texas).
To me this shows it's a breakdown of the agreement of law between the citizens and the government.
Resistance to legal police work should be punished severely.
That seems at-odds with the article's aside that:
> The operation is reminiscent of Amazon “package sting” operations that several police departments attempted several years ago, in which empty Amazon boxes were placed on people’s porches while police officers watched. Those sting operations resulted in zero known arrests.
Next step would be for citizens to build profiles on their local police departments and law enforcement in general if the adversarial relationship continues, as law enforcement officers appear to be disproportionally predisposed to committing crimes. I have a thesis on why those attracted to these jobs are more likely to be criminals, but will save that for another thread. “Show me the man and I’ll show you the crime." Put them under the microscope, like they wish to do to the public. The panopticon works both ways. Fundamentally, you have to build systems to make law enforcement allergic to treating their local citizens like this. They have forgotten who they are supposed to protect and serve. Remind them, while remaining firmly within the legal framework. Or, just take the ALPRs down. That is a choice. Eventually, supporters of ALPRs will be voted out, but it might take a while (election cycles).
The IJ Database of ALPR Abuse - https://ij.org/the-ij-database-of-alpr-abuse/ (173 incidents documented, as of this comment)
Resource spotlight: Data projects tracking police misconduct, use of force, and employment histories - https://www.prisonpolicy.org/blog/2026/01/26/police_miscondu... - January 26th, 2026
Study finds police officers arrested 1,100 times per year, or 3 per day, nationwide - https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/true-crime/wp/2016/06/22... | https://archive.today/uS3yR - June 23rd, 2016
Police Integrity Lost: A Study of Law Enforcement Officers Arrested - https://web.archive.org/web/20260610154033/https://www.ojp.g...
(and lets not forget our forum favorite on the topic of police misconduct, the Marion County Record, with damages exceeding $4M for the police misconduct that occurred)
No, if you abuse a day where everyone dresses up for fun to commit crimes, the fun dress-up part will no longer be tolerated.
If you still think that it's a good idea to have a purge night, foresight doesn't seem to be your strong point regardless as to whom or why they are oppressing you. Keep in mind that Flock is just another flavor of the day.
Also the stalking argument is old and stale: it's the same talking points presented with Facebook admins stalking loved one, and then again in the Snowden leaks... and then it becomes normalized after a while.
First time?
> I've been hearing about Halloween is National DeFlock Day for a while
According to you, that's "committing crimes." I know that times are different now, but thoughtcrimes and de facto criminalization without legal codification are supposed to be unjust and unconstitutional. It's even more ironic when someone so obsessed with law and order goes so far as to invent crimes while ignoring the actual crimes that prompted the protests in the first place. So hypocritical. Mass surveillance, stalking, and putting people behind bars without evidence is supposed to be illegal, you know.
Also, stalking is okay as long as it's normalized? Wow, that's literally the logic of predators. No wonder your reply is what it is. Our guiding ethics are incompatible on a fundamental level.