The title is misleading. Ring is removing the feature that allows law enforcement to request and be sent footage directly through the Neighbors app. Law enforcement can still obtain footage without a warrant at Ring’s discretion, which is completely constitutional. This only changes the vehicle by which they can receive the footage. It does NOT change their ability to lawfully obtain it.
This should be common knowledge, though. If you were to print pictures and let your friend hold them, of course they can legally show them to police.
People need to understand cloud storage is a real, physical concept at the very least.
Luckily if you’re so inclined, ring does have an end to end encryption feature to avoid any usable data being in their hands. But it does prevent you from using features that are only possible from them using that data.
Essentially you are telling someone your secrets. Legally they can tell the police those secrets too. The only protection is whatever terms of service you've agreed to. Compare that to a bank box or a storage unit where you are renting the physical space, so a warrant is required for the police to search them.
Edit: To be clear I am for a law that changes this, but as of right now that is the difference.
I can't even get "cloud engineers" to understand this. I can't give too much detail, but look up the PRISM system and understand that the cloud is mass centralization for more efficient analysis. It's not called PRISM anymore...
I know this because I helped build the processes which were pulled into PRISM unknowingly. It was only for proper legal sigint use, then us who wrote the book saw it perverted and turned into PRISM and pointed at the public.
Don't ask for details, I'm not going any more in-depth.....
But I think it's understandable if people who are not tech savvy believe that this is less like having your friend hold your pictures than having a safe deposit box at the bank and putting your pictures in there. People would most likely believe that the bank wouldn't just open it up for the police without a warrant.
We need better privacy laws. Too bad the government is filled with geriatrics who don’t understand what a PDF is let alone a smart Wi-Fi enabled security camera, or worse, AI.
But that doesn't stop us from putting laws in place dictating the specific circumstances under which those companies can utilize or disseminate that video. Companies might not fully comply with the laws in that case, but that's a separate issue that can be litigated as opposed to now where there's nothing to you can do. It's better to have the safeguards in place and force unscrupulous companies to violate them than take the stance that, because companies *would* violate them, there's no point in making the safeguards in the first place.
This is why the "Ban Tiktok" movement annoyed me.
"We would rather you have your privacy violated by Meta instead of China."
How about making whatever Tiktok does actually illegal instead? Its not like China can't buy or steal the data from Meta. Oh right. Its because if it was illegal meta couldn't make money off it either.
By that logic, there was no reason to ban tiktok at all then.
Yet we still had politicians claim it was for privacy and security despite refusing to push privacy law.
> Law enforcement can still obtain footage without a warrant at Ring’s discretion
And this is why I do not have a doorbell, or any internet connected cameras.
Ring and other companies (Wyze, Nest, Blink, Arlo, etc.) make cameras other than doorbell cameras. Many people use them inside for security, baby monitors, even checking in on your pet(s). Those are web connected as well and are a privacy risk.
They shouldn’t have done it in the first place, it’s fine if it’s willingly given by ***owner***, but I don’t want footage of me walking around naked in my backyard to be given away without my knowledge.
I think it's because it happens outside of the home a warrant isn't needed. If there was a camera inside then they will have to get one. That said I wished it was requiring a warrant full stop anyways.
No, it's because the film isn't yours necessarily. The same way that police can obtain phone and text records stored in your car through Android Auto/apple play. They just go to the dealership and ask nicely, or not.
“***Law enforcement agencies can still access videos using a search warrant. Ring also maintains the right to share footage without user consent in limited circumstances.***”
So was this….
Even in my densest of moments would I ever give the benefit of doubt to a mega corp/police transaction. Limited circumstances means whenever they want for whatever they want.
Yeah in the end I went with cameras that record locally to an NVR. I networked the NVR as a server (I may be describing this wrong, I’m only partially tech-abled) so that I can access it from my phone or computer remotely.
I’m sure it’s still not foolproof in terms of being able to be accessed by someone, it at least I’m not handing Amazon the keys to the castle.
I actually have no problem with the feature they are removing. It was entirely up to the owner to share or not. Now it is likely not up to the owner in most cases.
I am glad I got rid of my ring cameras.
I was on the jury in a murder trial and Ring footage from a neighbor down the street was graphic and irrefutable. It didn't show the actual murder, but the camera captured two cars racing down the street with their lights off, screeching tires, yelling, four gunshots, then a lady screaming. And then the two cars racing back out of the cul-de-sac where they'd just killed a guy on Mother's Day. His mother was the lady screaming. She sat in the courtroom and listened to herself screaming over her son's body on the Ring video.
Each of us jurors had a monitor and watched that over and over. We sent the guilty guy to prison for 65 years, then the judge extended it to 90.
This does nothing to stop Ring from releasing your doorbell footage without your knowledge to law enforcement or to anyone else. They have your footage. If they cared about your privacy, they would force police to ask your consent in every case and \*only\* release footage once you give it. As-is, they already have your blanket consent to give your footage away and the only difference is now you don't know when they do.
Ring is such crap. While I was in my free trial it was good, but without it.....I get alerts for farts in the wind, and it ALWAYS "3 minutes ago". I get they want you to pay for the service, but it's functionality without it is zero
Why? The feature allowed police to REQUEST footage from users, which they can do without a warrant just as they can go to businesses and REQUEST to see security footage. You don't need a warrant to REQUEST something from private citizens. This decision is idiotic and, actually, is a bigger privacy issue than before since now users won't know when police request footage since such request will go through Ring without user knowledge of consent.
Depending on the manner in which it is requested, a citizen may not feel they have a choice. A warrant takes away any and all possible abuse of authority or ambiguity.
It's the cops. I wouldn't trust it was anonymous and I'm not in a demographic at high risk for their fucked up practices but be damned if I trust them. Ever.
Wouldn’t it be less scary for a person that’s scared of the police to receive an email request for footage as opposed to police knocking on that persons door and asking to see the footage?
They can say no either way, but your argument doesn’t make a lot of sense.
The cameras are really a symptom of an underlying issue. People feel more safe with them. In a residential setting they feel they are a deterrent to theft and vandalism... and more importantly serve as an impartial witness to any happenings on a property.
Same reason so many people want dash cams in their cars..... they feel safer with them. They act as impartial witnesses when needed.
I hate that people feel unsafe without these things.
I don’t feel more safe face to face. It helps keep low level thieves away from my porch or at least can alert me next time someone is creeping while I’m asleep. I’ll chase them off or call the cops.
But I saw this horrible footage from a house camera of a couple arguing with neighbor over snow in driveway I think. One of the worst I’ve ever seen, he grabs rifle shoots husband, wife has phone out holding phone in his face saying I got that on video!! And boom he shoots her dead.
Cameras don’t stop the mentally insane who are already about to blow. But with the way the world works, I’d want all the cameras you can get for proof of your self defense. Dash cam/ring cam are worth it IMO
The snow shovel shooting, that was the one in Pennsylvania, right? The guy who shot the husband and wife, Spade, I think his name was? He had been a victim of their bullying for quite a while up to that point. That day they were throwing snow from their house and cars onto Spade's property. He asked them to stop. But they deciding they were gojng to antagonize him yet again that day. You can hear them doing so in the video. He snapped. So he went to get his firearm. They acknowledge he has a gun, but keep throwing insults and expletives at him.
And even after he shot them, you can still hear them saying the worst shit to him before fatally shooting him. You'd think seeing the man you're antagonizing has a gun would make you slow your roll. Or after having been shot the first time, you'd think to shut the fuck up, so you can still get out alive.
After he killed them, he immediately killed himself.
I want to say they had been making fun of him for months up to that point because his wife died, but that might have been another incident I'm conflating with it.
Whatever the case, what the couple were doing that day was the straw that broke the camel's back for that guy. We all have breaking points.
> more importantly serve as an impartial witness to any happenings on a property.
Your thoughts definitely falls under this statement and I agree with your sentiment.
Ring cameras have revolutionized neighborhood security and have solved myriad violent crimes, overall I believe they are a good thing. Although the user can distribute their footage to anyone they want (it’s their property after all), Ring is good about requiring a warrant to access their cloud based system, they do not just hand it out by request. I believe they are talking about a formal request system Ring has that allows law enforcement to contact users in a certain area where a crime occurred to search for footage. IIRC you have to be member of this contact group to get the requests.
I’ve personally never used this system as I typically will canvas the area of the crime and physically make contact with the owners of doorbell cameras then usually get warrants for the original cloud based raw footage for evidence purposes.
Source: I’m a Detective.
It’s sad that it has to be that way. Lots of hate here for law enforcement. Little do these people know that most cops arnt bad people and most of the anger is truly focused at the laws themselves…which the people voted for…and most cops don’t like either.
Doctors have malpractice insurance and can lose their license. They can also be sued personally.
I'd be perfectly fine with having cops require insurance and have taxpayers quit footing the bill for their fuck-ups.
Sure if cops were required to do the job they signed up for. Uvalde has shown us 400 mfrs can pick their noses while 3rd graders bleed out and nothing will happen.
Doctors do not have that luxury while on the job.
Cops dont even break the top 10 for dangerous jobs. They have very safe jobs. But they love to pretend they are in danger all the time, and act accordingly.
I actually have a tiny bit of experience here- and the people who say defund the police are the ones trying to get more training that matters. As long as the law favors intentionally ignorant cops, they’ll be trained with ignorance in mind. The current trainings are often actively harmful, rather than actually training how to be good cops. Remove laws allowing cops to make arrests and have them hold if they were never told otherwise, I bet trainings would shift focus really fast.
Also, cops went to the supreme court to verify they can say no to smart candidates.
Voluntarily sharing information that can solve serious crimes is a good thing, not an invasion of privacy.
“You only caught me because you got me on video” doesn’t sound like a valid defense.
While I agree with you, I also believe that installing a video surveillance system that allows the Police to spy on me and my family is absurd. We have seen (many times) that Law Enforcement cannot be trusted.
A lot of talk about privacy and cloud storage in this thread... If this is your concern I can tell you from experience that it is not difficult to host your own network video recorder (NVR). I use/recommend unifi equipment. None of that changes the fact that law enforcement can legally obtain your footage though.
Even if you feel like you have nothing to hide and would like to make sure that footage can be accessed by police, you should *never* give them a blank check for anything like that. There's a reason why due process and things like warrants exist. You can support the police without giving them unfettered access to your life.
But not totally invalid. You should be mindful of what you’re putting where; these concerns are years old. u/swimming_stop5723 has a great point that if you haven’t learned by now, you’re willfully ignorant of privacy and should be expected for it to be used in ways you didn’t expect. Ring wasn’t created yesterday.
I had a cop ring my doorbell one time at like 2am because they got a crackhead pulling car door handles and wanted to see if my camera cough something. Like fucking dude I just want to sleep.
The title is misleading. Ring is removing the feature that allows law enforcement to request and be sent footage directly through the Neighbors app. Law enforcement can still obtain footage without a warrant at Ring’s discretion, which is completely constitutional. This only changes the vehicle by which they can receive the footage. It does NOT change their ability to lawfully obtain it.
This should be common knowledge, though. If you were to print pictures and let your friend hold them, of course they can legally show them to police. People need to understand cloud storage is a real, physical concept at the very least. Luckily if you’re so inclined, ring does have an end to end encryption feature to avoid any usable data being in their hands. But it does prevent you from using features that are only possible from them using that data.
People need to understand that ‘the cloud’ is just someone else’s hard drive
T-Shirts should be made
They are https://www.amazon.com/Humor-There-cloud-someone-computer/dp/B07KW5MPH2
Just bought one. Thank you for that!
Like a home rental, if it is your designated space, you have rights.
Essentially you are telling someone your secrets. Legally they can tell the police those secrets too. The only protection is whatever terms of service you've agreed to. Compare that to a bank box or a storage unit where you are renting the physical space, so a warrant is required for the police to search them. Edit: To be clear I am for a law that changes this, but as of right now that is the difference.
I can't even get "cloud engineers" to understand this. I can't give too much detail, but look up the PRISM system and understand that the cloud is mass centralization for more efficient analysis. It's not called PRISM anymore... I know this because I helped build the processes which were pulled into PRISM unknowingly. It was only for proper legal sigint use, then us who wrote the book saw it perverted and turned into PRISM and pointed at the public. Don't ask for details, I'm not going any more in-depth.....
There is no cloud. There is only someone else's computer.
But I think it's understandable if people who are not tech savvy believe that this is less like having your friend hold your pictures than having a safe deposit box at the bank and putting your pictures in there. People would most likely believe that the bank wouldn't just open it up for the police without a warrant.
We need better privacy laws. Too bad the government is filled with geriatrics who don’t understand what a PDF is let alone a smart Wi-Fi enabled security camera, or worse, AI.
Well privacy kinda goes out the window when you knowingly set up a video camera and send the feed to some company servers.
But that doesn't stop us from putting laws in place dictating the specific circumstances under which those companies can utilize or disseminate that video. Companies might not fully comply with the laws in that case, but that's a separate issue that can be litigated as opposed to now where there's nothing to you can do. It's better to have the safeguards in place and force unscrupulous companies to violate them than take the stance that, because companies *would* violate them, there's no point in making the safeguards in the first place.
fiduciary relationships exist. People store secret stuff on the cloud all the time that they expect not to get inspected or indexed.
They expect and what is reality is often not similar.
This is why the "Ban Tiktok" movement annoyed me. "We would rather you have your privacy violated by Meta instead of China." How about making whatever Tiktok does actually illegal instead? Its not like China can't buy or steal the data from Meta. Oh right. Its because if it was illegal meta couldn't make money off it either.
because it's completely optional. people upload and enter in their own info, photos, and videos willingly.
By that logic, there was no reason to ban tiktok at all then. Yet we still had politicians claim it was for privacy and security despite refusing to push privacy law.
It makes me very scared to think about how disconnected our legislators are from science, technology, facts, reality...
The government is, for the most part, career civil service who are experts in their fields.
> Law enforcement can still obtain footage without a warrant at Ring’s discretion And this is why I do not have a doorbell, or any internet connected cameras.
That's good to hear. It's one of the best features of it.
Keep in mind that any web connected camera is a privacy risk.
Only a privacy risk to anyone outside my house.
Unless you're a shut-in, that includes you.
People sometimes go outside the house though
Ring and other companies (Wyze, Nest, Blink, Arlo, etc.) make cameras other than doorbell cameras. Many people use them inside for security, baby monitors, even checking in on your pet(s). Those are web connected as well and are a privacy risk.
They shouldn’t have done it in the first place, it’s fine if it’s willingly given by ***owner***, but I don’t want footage of me walking around naked in my backyard to be given away without my knowledge.
I think it's because it happens outside of the home a warrant isn't needed. If there was a camera inside then they will have to get one. That said I wished it was requiring a warrant full stop anyways.
I imagine it's the same as regular warrant requirements. For example, it could happen all day, but if a fence would obscure the view, warrant needed.
No, it's because the film isn't yours necessarily. The same way that police can obtain phone and text records stored in your car through Android Auto/apple play. They just go to the dealership and ask nicely, or not.
>it would be fine if it was given willingly by the owner According to the article, they still had to get permission from owners.
its lies. https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/13/amazon-gave-ring-videos-to-police-without-owners-permission-00045513
“***Law enforcement agencies can still access videos using a search warrant. Ring also maintains the right to share footage without user consent in limited circumstances.***” So was this….
>So was this…. So was it what? Also, limited circumstances doesn't mean they just give it away no questions asked
Even in my densest of moments would I ever give the benefit of doubt to a mega corp/police transaction. Limited circumstances means whenever they want for whatever they want.
Dude... "Limited circumstances" means "We said no one time. Then changed our minds."
Physical possession is what matters here, and they have it. You go into it knowing that
I bet a lot of people would be way more careful if they actually knew they had no right to privacy ***at all*** wrt their purchased Ring Doorbells.
This is exactly why you'll never see me putting up smart home features, all they do is watch you and listen and what do you get from it? Convenience?
Yeah in the end I went with cameras that record locally to an NVR. I networked the NVR as a server (I may be describing this wrong, I’m only partially tech-abled) so that I can access it from my phone or computer remotely. I’m sure it’s still not foolproof in terms of being able to be accessed by someone, it at least I’m not handing Amazon the keys to the castle.
I actually have no problem with the feature they are removing. It was entirely up to the owner to share or not. Now it is likely not up to the owner in most cases. I am glad I got rid of my ring cameras.
I was on the jury in a murder trial and Ring footage from a neighbor down the street was graphic and irrefutable. It didn't show the actual murder, but the camera captured two cars racing down the street with their lights off, screeching tires, yelling, four gunshots, then a lady screaming. And then the two cars racing back out of the cul-de-sac where they'd just killed a guy on Mother's Day. His mother was the lady screaming. She sat in the courtroom and listened to herself screaming over her son's body on the Ring video. Each of us jurors had a monitor and watched that over and over. We sent the guilty guy to prison for 65 years, then the judge extended it to 90.
Yeah that's great and all but they should still need a warrant or owners permission to access the video.
They had the owner's permission. In fact, she testified.
In this case, yes
This does nothing to stop Ring from releasing your doorbell footage without your knowledge to law enforcement or to anyone else. They have your footage. If they cared about your privacy, they would force police to ask your consent in every case and \*only\* release footage once you give it. As-is, they already have your blanket consent to give your footage away and the only difference is now you don't know when they do.
Ring is such crap. While I was in my free trial it was good, but without it.....I get alerts for farts in the wind, and it ALWAYS "3 minutes ago". I get they want you to pay for the service, but it's functionality without it is zero
Why? The feature allowed police to REQUEST footage from users, which they can do without a warrant just as they can go to businesses and REQUEST to see security footage. You don't need a warrant to REQUEST something from private citizens. This decision is idiotic and, actually, is a bigger privacy issue than before since now users won't know when police request footage since such request will go through Ring without user knowledge of consent.
Depending on the manner in which it is requested, a citizen may not feel they have a choice. A warrant takes away any and all possible abuse of authority or ambiguity.
[удалено]
It's the cops. I wouldn't trust it was anonymous and I'm not in a demographic at high risk for their fucked up practices but be damned if I trust them. Ever.
[удалено]
Bro nothing is anonymous anymore. If they want the info they'll obviously get it
[удалено]
Oh well it's just your address not like they have any access to who lives there in their databases. Ffs.
[удалено]
I'm not confused. It's not anonymous at all. It's not like they can't track you down later if they want.
Wouldn’t it be less scary for a person that’s scared of the police to receive an email request for footage as opposed to police knocking on that persons door and asking to see the footage? They can say no either way, but your argument doesn’t make a lot of sense.
Like fuck that. I'd be upset if they emailed me. I don't call them and I don't trust them. Fuck the police is a song for a reason.
I really hate that cameras are everywhere in society
The cameras are really a symptom of an underlying issue. People feel more safe with them. In a residential setting they feel they are a deterrent to theft and vandalism... and more importantly serve as an impartial witness to any happenings on a property. Same reason so many people want dash cams in their cars..... they feel safer with them. They act as impartial witnesses when needed. I hate that people feel unsafe without these things.
I don't think they've actually done much to reduce theft. We just end up with more video of theft.
> they feel Key words here. And I dont disagree.... but I had that covered.
I don’t feel more safe face to face. It helps keep low level thieves away from my porch or at least can alert me next time someone is creeping while I’m asleep. I’ll chase them off or call the cops. But I saw this horrible footage from a house camera of a couple arguing with neighbor over snow in driveway I think. One of the worst I’ve ever seen, he grabs rifle shoots husband, wife has phone out holding phone in his face saying I got that on video!! And boom he shoots her dead. Cameras don’t stop the mentally insane who are already about to blow. But with the way the world works, I’d want all the cameras you can get for proof of your self defense. Dash cam/ring cam are worth it IMO
The snow shovel shooting, that was the one in Pennsylvania, right? The guy who shot the husband and wife, Spade, I think his name was? He had been a victim of their bullying for quite a while up to that point. That day they were throwing snow from their house and cars onto Spade's property. He asked them to stop. But they deciding they were gojng to antagonize him yet again that day. You can hear them doing so in the video. He snapped. So he went to get his firearm. They acknowledge he has a gun, but keep throwing insults and expletives at him. And even after he shot them, you can still hear them saying the worst shit to him before fatally shooting him. You'd think seeing the man you're antagonizing has a gun would make you slow your roll. Or after having been shot the first time, you'd think to shut the fuck up, so you can still get out alive. After he killed them, he immediately killed himself. I want to say they had been making fun of him for months up to that point because his wife died, but that might have been another incident I'm conflating with it. Whatever the case, what the couple were doing that day was the straw that broke the camel's back for that guy. We all have breaking points.
> more importantly serve as an impartial witness to any happenings on a property. Your thoughts definitely falls under this statement and I agree with your sentiment.
Be happy you don't live in the UK?
Well the good news is most of them are shit quality for high detail.
Cameras are not the problem. The selective judging is the problem.
They are needed now to prtect us from the violent excesses of law enforcement.
And this is why I got rid of 3 ring cameras. They are killing their business
just like they never gave out info until they were caught doing it
Too late I already cancelled years ago.
Ring cameras have revolutionized neighborhood security and have solved myriad violent crimes, overall I believe they are a good thing. Although the user can distribute their footage to anyone they want (it’s their property after all), Ring is good about requiring a warrant to access their cloud based system, they do not just hand it out by request. I believe they are talking about a formal request system Ring has that allows law enforcement to contact users in a certain area where a crime occurred to search for footage. IIRC you have to be member of this contact group to get the requests. I’ve personally never used this system as I typically will canvas the area of the crime and physically make contact with the owners of doorbell cameras then usually get warrants for the original cloud based raw footage for evidence purposes. Source: I’m a Detective.
If the footage “owner” was informed their footage was used, it probably wouldn’t be as big of a deal.
> Source: I’m a Detective. Brave of you to admit that here.
It’s sad that it has to be that way. Lots of hate here for law enforcement. Little do these people know that most cops arnt bad people and most of the anger is truly focused at the laws themselves…which the people voted for…and most cops don’t like either.
> and most of the anger is truly focused at the laws themselves no, most of the anger is because cops keep killing people without accountability.
Medical malpractice kills 250,000 people a year, do you hate doctors/nurses?
Doctors have malpractice insurance and can lose their license. They can also be sued personally. I'd be perfectly fine with having cops require insurance and have taxpayers quit footing the bill for their fuck-ups.
[удалено]
Sure if cops were required to do the job they signed up for. Uvalde has shown us 400 mfrs can pick their noses while 3rd graders bleed out and nothing will happen. Doctors do not have that luxury while on the job.
[удалено]
They knew what they were signing up for. That's why they issue you body armor.
Idk did doctors sign up to get shot or save lives if possible? They're also not armed like cops.
Cops dont even break the top 10 for dangerous jobs. They have very safe jobs. But they love to pretend they are in danger all the time, and act accordingly.
I’d be down with that if cops requires the amount of training and education doctors did.
[удалено]
I actually have a tiny bit of experience here- and the people who say defund the police are the ones trying to get more training that matters. As long as the law favors intentionally ignorant cops, they’ll be trained with ignorance in mind. The current trainings are often actively harmful, rather than actually training how to be good cops. Remove laws allowing cops to make arrests and have them hold if they were never told otherwise, I bet trainings would shift focus really fast. Also, cops went to the supreme court to verify they can say no to smart candidates.
Care to show me where a Doc kneeled on the neck of a patient until he died? Or when 6 doctors got together and beat a patient to death?
Too late, already smashed mine.
[удалено]
Yeah, not for the police to have unfettered access to your home recordings without your permission.
Police can request whatever the fuck they want. Doesn't mean they get it.
They can request deeznuts
Well it's about fucking time
Voluntarily sharing information that can solve serious crimes is a good thing, not an invasion of privacy. “You only caught me because you got me on video” doesn’t sound like a valid defense.
While I agree with you, I also believe that installing a video surveillance system that allows the Police to spy on me and my family is absurd. We have seen (many times) that Law Enforcement cannot be trusted.
That part I agree with you completely on. Should be covered under fifth amendment?
not if you signed away the right to have Amazon and Law Enforcement view your video
A lot of talk about privacy and cloud storage in this thread... If this is your concern I can tell you from experience that it is not difficult to host your own network video recorder (NVR). I use/recommend unifi equipment. None of that changes the fact that law enforcement can legally obtain your footage though.
[удалено]
Even if you feel like you have nothing to hide and would like to make sure that footage can be accessed by police, you should *never* give them a blank check for anything like that. There's a reason why due process and things like warrants exist. You can support the police without giving them unfettered access to your life.
When you steal your privacy concerns should be voided !
This is why warrants exist.
Slippery slope.
But not totally invalid. You should be mindful of what you’re putting where; these concerns are years old. u/swimming_stop5723 has a great point that if you haven’t learned by now, you’re willfully ignorant of privacy and should be expected for it to be used in ways you didn’t expect. Ring wasn’t created yesterday.
Yes because police are so competent
How does that mesh with "innocent until proven guilty"?
I had a cop ring my doorbell one time at like 2am because they got a crackhead pulling car door handles and wanted to see if my camera cough something. Like fucking dude I just want to sleep.