While I think the use of the term “terrorist” is unwarranted, I do think deflock is seeking political change. The decision to use flock is a government policy choice, right?

Just the people’s choice, right? They voted for this government policy, right???!? https://www.coloradopolitics.com/2025/10/22/denver-mayor-ext...

>> “I was stunned to learn late yesterday that after convening a task force of local and national experts, Mayor Johnston has been negotiating secretly with the discredited CEO of Flock Safety and signing another unilateral extension of this mass surveillance contract with no public process and no vote from the City Council or input from his own task force,” Councilmember Sarah Parady told The Denver Gazette.

What is the point of this comment? Are you saying that deflock are not terrorists but are terrorist adjacent? Why respond to someone defining terrorism by pointing out that 2 words at the end of the definition also apply to deflock? Do those not apply to basically everyone who participates in their country's society, including literally everyone who votes and all politicians?

Political parties seek political change too, but that doesn't make them terrorists. Deflock isn't trying to intimidate or cause violence to citizens.

If corporations can be people, cameras can be people too! Think of the cameras! /s

Please don't give them ideas like that, even in jest.