zlacker

>>ptk+(OP)
So Fun facts about digital cameras like these: Strong infrared leds at night blind them completely. They sometimes even switch into daymode and become useless at night. Also, lasers are usually not enough to destroy the ccd sensor but only cause small dots to appear[0]. But a Spraycan on a stick can be very effective and of course a silenced airgun for those hard to reach places can be very effective.

[0] Lab Test here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wNWNQb2AvQM

>>IlikeK+59
Firing projectiles to destroy cameras (it doesn't matter how the slug is thrown) is... oh why bother, people won't change.

spray-chalk on a stick.

>>privat+qa
But airguns are usually much less regulated, much quieter and easier to supress and the legal liability for firing an airgun somewhere vs a firearm is usually much different. And they usually have enough power for that purpose without risking too much colleteral damage.

>>IlikeK+hb
I don’t even think an airgun could really have an effect, but for anyone contemplating this kind of thing, please at least deconstruct the device and put it into something different looking. There is no point in getting offed with impunity by some Idiocracy goon because he saw a finger gun.

Better use of one’s efforts could be to support legal challenges of this clearly unconstitutional mass surveillance by the government through its corporate, or in this case, YC cutouts.

>>hopeli+qI
There are airguns available otc with the power equal to roughly a 45 ACP fired from a pistol. I doubt these cameras can resist that.