I’m really curious, because people throw “doxxing” around a lot. And this example doesn’t even include any identifiable info, just the make/model/year/color of a car.
So… What is your definition of doxxing?
Speeding isn’t a constitutional right like protest. And public streets aren’t private homes. Should people expect to break laws and endanger their neighbors, in public, and we’re all supposed to… pretend we don’t see them? What’s your definition here?
And this example doesn’t even include any identifiable info, just the make/model/year/color of a car.
Make/model/year/color/frequent locations of a car are absolutely enough identifiable info to stalk someone.
Should people expect to break laws and endanger their neighbors, in public, and we’re all supposed to… pretend we don’t see them? What’s your definition here?
And what’s your suggestion? What do you think people should/could/might do with enough information to stalk someone that someone online said is breaking the law with no more evidence than “I said so”?
So… What *is* your definition of doxxing?
Giving everyone online enough information to stalk and harass someone, especially when it comes along with a motive to do so.
Incorrect. There is plenty of evidence, and the group behind this (Transportation Alternatives) is reputable and well-known. Here is the evidence, which is also linked in the OP.
What do you think people should/could/might do with enough information
Law enforcement should act, and if they don’t, we should put pressure on law enforcement using the democratic tools at our disposal. Dangerously speeding cars are not the rising sun; we don’t just have to accept them as a fact of life.
Giving everyone online enough information to stalk and harass someone
If a student shoots up a school and then tries to hide with the other kids, and the kids point him out to the police, are they doxxing the shooter? Is this crowd doxxing a shooter? Why do speeders have an unfettered right to menace the public, but the public can’t hold them accountable? We wouldn’t tolerate that with any other crime committed in public. And driving is a privilege, not a right
If a student shoots up a school and then tries to hide with the other kids, and the kids point him out to the police, are they doxxing the shooter?
No.
Law enforcement should act, and if they don’t, we should put pressure on law enforcement using the democratic tools at our disposal.
Absolutely!
Doxxing is sharing information that can facilitate vigilante justice.
Based on that article, I’m confused because I thought getting too many speeding tickets in a short time would lead to bigger consequences up to losing your license. I don’t understand how someone could get hundreds of tickets in a year. Does New York just have very lax speeding ticket laws compared to other states?
Also the full article includes even more identifiable information, such as the actual license plates.
I think we’re in agreement that the police/legal system should be clamping down on these speeders. I certainly share your confusion here re: why they’re allowed to continue doing this.
But, as we’re both seeing, the police aren’t doing their jobs, and these guys are allowed to continue menacing our streets. This happens against a general backdrop where drivers are regularly prioritized over everyone else-- to the point that that can literally kill someone and still walk. In that environment, what are we supposed to do? I think this method – highlighting that we’re watching, that the police could stop this today by simply doing their jobs-- is one of the democratic tools at our disposal.
I’m really curious, because people throw “doxxing” around a lot. And this example doesn’t even include any identifiable info, just the make/model/year/color of a car.
So… What is your definition of doxxing?
Speeding isn’t a constitutional right like protest. And public streets aren’t private homes. Should people expect to break laws and endanger their neighbors, in public, and we’re all supposed to… pretend we don’t see them? What’s your definition here?
Make/model/year/color/frequent locations of a car are absolutely enough identifiable info to stalk someone.
And what’s your suggestion? What do you think people should/could/might do with enough information to stalk someone that someone online said is breaking the law with no more evidence than “I said so”?
Giving everyone online enough information to stalk and harass someone, especially when it comes along with a motive to do so.
Incorrect. There is plenty of evidence, and the group behind this (Transportation Alternatives) is reputable and well-known. Here is the evidence, which is also linked in the OP.
Law enforcement should act, and if they don’t, we should put pressure on law enforcement using the democratic tools at our disposal. Dangerously speeding cars are not the rising sun; we don’t just have to accept them as a fact of life.
If a student shoots up a school and then tries to hide with the other kids, and the kids point him out to the police, are they doxxing the shooter? Is this crowd doxxing a shooter? Why do speeders have an unfettered right to menace the public, but the public can’t hold them accountable? We wouldn’t tolerate that with any other crime committed in public. And driving is a privilege, not a right
No.
Absolutely!
Doxxing is sharing information that can facilitate vigilante justice.
Based on that article, I’m confused because I thought getting too many speeding tickets in a short time would lead to bigger consequences up to losing your license. I don’t understand how someone could get hundreds of tickets in a year. Does New York just have very lax speeding ticket laws compared to other states?
Also the full article includes even more identifiable information, such as the actual license plates.
I think we’re in agreement that the police/legal system should be clamping down on these speeders. I certainly share your confusion here re: why they’re allowed to continue doing this.
But, as we’re both seeing, the police aren’t doing their jobs, and these guys are allowed to continue menacing our streets. This happens against a general backdrop where drivers are regularly prioritized over everyone else-- to the point that that can literally kill someone and still walk. In that environment, what are we supposed to do? I think this method – highlighting that we’re watching, that the police could stop this today by simply doing their jobs-- is one of the democratic tools at our disposal.