Luke Rudkowski’s Camera Rig

Luke Rudkowski of WeAreChange presents  the various functions of the sensory body suit he has constructed, to protect and prevail his constitutionally guaranteed rights against the gnashing teeth of the ignorant police state; ignorant in that they ignore the very rights they are sworn to uphold, thus requiring such cybernetic lengths from modern activists.

Turning the panoptic tables one sovereign at a time.


Luke Rudkowski of We Are Change gave us an overview of his custom camera rig when at the Lemonade and Raw Milk Freedom Day in Washington DC on August 18th, 2012.

Akin to the ideas you might have gotten from Rick Rynerson on how to outfit your vehicle to safeguard your rights, it’s my hope Rudkowski’s overview of his set-up will cause you to think about and implement ways to better protect yourself when on foot, through the use of technology and transparency.

It’s all about sharing ideas and learning from each other.

Granted, most of us don’t now have the resources to so-completely deck-out our car like Rynerson’s Eclipse or to duplicate Rudkowski’s mobile camera/streaming operation, but even if you incorporate just one new device or streaming capability you’re that much safer.

For more with Rudkowski / We Are Change:

Thanks to Clyde Voluntaryist of Never Take A Plea and Carolinas Cop Block for capturing broll used in this video.

43 Comments on "Luke Rudkowski’s Camera Rig"

  1. pretty sad to see what it takes
    to preserve civil rights
    in the Land of the Free

  2. Good for Luke.

    What he didn’t say is, he may also be packing one or more pinhole cameras disguised as ordinary objects (a pen, for example.) Just in case the cops “accidentally” smash into his rig and send it crashing to the ground.

    I’m all for citizens recording the actions of the “authorities” as these “authorities” go about their business.

  3. Theshaw81 | Sep 16, 2012 at 3:40 pm |

    Do you really need to glorify this little Alex Jones wannabe.

    •  Do you really need to troll activists?

      • I get that his heart is in the right place, but he’s got an attitude and style that makes him very unlikable.

        • Marklar_Prime | Sep 16, 2012 at 6:23 pm |

           As opposed to the lovable mass murdering fascists that we keep voting for.

        • “SUPER HEREOS!
          Get your power, your masks and capes snatched
          Brooklyn take what you can’t take back
          I know a lot of cats hate that
          All I can say black
          There’s a city full of walls you can post complaints at
          All the doubters and believers adjust your receivers
          “I feel it,” you can taste it through the speakers
          The three six oh-riginal sketch lyrics so visual
          They rent my rhyme books at your nearest home video”
          -Mos Def

          I understand that we all have personality type attraction or rejection for various reasons.  How would you suggest Luke adjust his personality or presentation to your liking?  Would he be able to achieve similar objectives by doing so?  Constructive criticism is welcomed.

          • Well, personality-wise he seems to have the attitude that, because things are corrupt, all established norms should be rejected. He views people who are within the system for better or worse, with extreme contempt, and he blatantly wears it on his shoulder as he “interviews” them. He demands a level of respect from his opponents that he refuses to show them. He is a direct reflection of a style in which you attack “the other” with no remorse. But the way he reflects it, is the exact same way that the “elites” hold disdain for their “other”. He plays into the stereotype of the crazed conspiracy madman so very well, that he can be an easy example used to dismiss any of the issues he is trying to bring up, even though, as I said, he has good intentions.

            He demands answers for questions that, in all honesty, he probably couldn’t deal with if he got them, because it would only amplify his extreme reactive nature, and frankly the people he “interviews” probably know this, and is probably precisely why he doesn’t get the answers(and also probably why he’s so viciously frustrated with these issues).

            But that’s enough ranting. Really though some of his more recent stuff was more restrained, so I think he’s learning, but I still have a really bitter first impression.

          • I think given the circumstances, anyone challenging the presumptive power mongers deserves credit first and critique second. 

            If the world were a little more just, a little more brave, we would have dozens of Lukes tailing every psychopathic criminal/ elected official who is responsible for untold misery and toil.  I also think you are ignoring countless examples of where Luke has extended every courtesy imaginable but persistently pressed for answers where the lapdog media has failed.

            If this means he is not PC enough in your mind perhaps you should explain how this work should be done when it is up to everyday people struggling to survive to risk their lives and their sanity to challenge those who en$lave the world so?  I just don’t get the whole kill the messenger thing.

            Granted “ambush” journalism is not always the highest demonstration of journalistic skill;  it is still an important tool given that the pathological crooks who are never challenged by the mainstream are not (read Never) likely to book Luke for a sit down interview.  Not when they can get fluffed by the latest puff piece in Vanity Fair. (Cough* “Money Ball”s Deep at the Chicago Bath House… but I digress)   So I get it, for someone reason Luke rubs you the wrong way.  But when is the last time you saw anyone make Henry Kissenger stutter?  When is the last time you saw Cheney run and hide from an Katie Couric question?  

            It’s time we stop pretending that any of those “in power” are any different than anyone else.  They are mortal and need to be reminded that they are nothing more or better than anyone else incarnated on this planet.  In this regard I think Luke is doing exceedingly well and leads by example. 

          • Just because he may deserve credit, doesn’t mean he’s going to get it. This is a very complex and tactical game hes playing, and his gung-ho strategy is shooting himself in the foot.

            It isn’t a situation of killing the messenger because of the message he brings. Its killing the messenger because he brought a message, and then called your mother a whore(probably because he thought he was entitled and invincible because its bad form to kill a messenger).

            He is making an important challenge, that much we agree upon, but I think he’s getting way ahead of himself. The kinds of issues he is trying to bring up requires a healthy media infrastructure, and his style is maybe even equally bad as the mainstream media even if it is in a completely different way.

          • Agree to disagree.  Infrastructures don’t make themselves.

          • Well i agree that infrastructure doesn’t make itself, i just see a lot of flaws in the infrastructure that WAC is trying to foster.

          •  Yes and it’s easy to critique from the sidelines, ever plan on getting in the game or I dunno leading by example?  Is the concept that foreign that no one understands it anymore?

          • you’re right it is easy. I know you guy’s are doing the hard work, and not me. I don’t have the activist spirit or experience to lead by example, but I do hope i can serve a little constructive criticism. Unfortunately it can only be constructive it is recognized as such. I apologize if my tone makes it seem like an all out attack but it isn’t.

  4. Calypso_1 | Sep 16, 2012 at 4:35 pm |

    It is interesting to me Camron that you chose to use the word cybernetic to describe these activities.  As you know I’m not terribly inclined to be supportive of how WAC goes about it’s operations.  However, I think if you were to explore the depth of this possible connection, in regards to the feedback loop of information that is being attempted in these endeavors and the nature of system control, you might go a long way to elevating the presentation above its current level. 

    •  Good point Calypso.  In retrospect I think I was aiming for a term more akin to biomechanical or cyborg but my subconscious won over and cybernetics was chosen.  I of course would like to find examples of the elevation you are describing.  Do you have any you could share with me?  Thanks for your comment 🙂

      • Calypso_1 | Sep 16, 2012 at 8:58 pm |

        Many people confuse cyborg and cybernetic.  Cybernetics originally comes from Greek referring to the magical timber that was provided by Athena from an oracular oak tree for the keel of the Argonauts ship.  It provided self-guiding navigation and instruction to the adventurous on their quest. 
        In modern parlance cybernetics involves feedback based control systems designed to change behavior.  It doesn’t just have to do with technology or biological systems but ALL control systems including social ones.
        I would hope that you might see the relevance to the methodologies of activism and citizen journalism as they could be understood by an examination through this discipline.  The powers that be certainly understand its significance. 
        There are many readily available resources to explore on these topics both from a laymen’s point of view all the way to high level mathematics. 
        At some point one must consider the potency of challenging a system that uses profoundly developed technologies and systems with what amounts to little more than juvenile antics.  I leave it to you and your cohorts to decide at what pace and what direction you choose to mature.

        • I am familiar with the cybernetic roots in the various Jason and the Argonaut myths. Robert Temple has a fascinating account of their relationship to deeper mysteries in his aptly titled work, “The Sirius Mystery”.

           I do believe that both definitions hold though, both cyborg and cybernetic.
          Example: “Tony just got cybernetic implants for his schlong and now his lady don’t need no vibrator”.  I appreciate your feedback though.  As far as maturity goes, well actions of course always speak louder than words and talk still does not boil the rice.  With those timeless parables in mind perhaps it is time that we see more of the armchair avant garde leading by example rather from the safe cloisters of the cybersphere.

          Don’t take that wrong 😉  I’m sure the powers that be imagine themselves above all of the creatures they presume to lord over.  Ridicule is a powerful tool for leveling the playing field and banishing wicked spirits to boot.

          Cheers and remember the emperor is butt naked.

          •  You didn’t provide any examples of how you see a higher mind being enacted on the We Are Change playing field.  Critique alone is a dry hump.  What and how would you do it better?

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 17, 2012 at 8:09 am |

            Write me a check.

            Otherwise you should start with:
            An Introduction to Information Theory: Symbols, Signals and Noise by John. Pierce.

            As to leading by example, please don’t presume that all work is done by running around strapped with cameras acquiring sound bites, nor meant to be consumed in the public sphere.

          • but… but… DEMOCRACY!

          •  Should I assume that “all work” is done by given exceedingly vague and presumptive “advice” in the form of backhanded “compliments” ?  Great job!  😉  Seriously though, talk is cheap, cryptic superheroes are as ephemeral as Napoleon Dynamite’s glamour shot girlfriend.  Always over the rainbow.  Don’t forget your bowstaff 😉

          • *Just joking of course*

            I appreciate you supplied me with an introduction to cybernetics but what information there in would you see as applying to this situation?  Cheers.

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 17, 2012 at 2:13 pm |

            Recommending you actually read a BOOK is not vague and it is presumptive only to the point of correctly assessing that you don’t have the requisite knowledge to receive the recommendations you seek. 
            To expect others to share affinity, perspective & purpose with your own endeavors to such a degree that you yourself would presume the right to receive their knowledge freely in a constructed and working format suitable for ready-made use speaks only to an immense level of naivety.
            I would in no way wish to foster this perspective in anyone who wishes to pursue the confrontational path with the system that you are on, as it leaves you WIDE open for manipulation by parties far more organized and equipped than your own. 

          • I’ve got dozens of books I could be reading, entice me with more than a VAGUE & presumptive diatribe as to how we (activists in WAC and otherwise) should be doing things.

            You seem to believe that we have to match abstract reification with an equal dose of cunning.  Not so, you need only speak the truth and remind people of their power to challenge the fallacy of authority. 

            Also you seem incapable of providing any salient advice, though you insinuate you are somehow this nuanced intelligence analyst/veteran,  and to decry me as lacking the requisite faculty is a circular logic escape route.

            ‘Pity’ me and provide just one ‘shining’ example or save your turgid logorrhea for someone who gives a shit. 

            Oh and I’m not going to pay you for your “services” so perhaps you should reconsider what it means to
            ‘give’ advice.

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 17, 2012 at 5:12 pm |

            Read the book.  Underline some passages.  Take notes.  Jot down your own thoughts regarding what you are reading.  Then if you do indeed but forth the effort – get back to me.  

            I have absolutely no desire to entice you.

          • I will look into it as I am able.  Is it so complicated that you can’t offer one example of it’s potential application for the lay public?

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 17, 2012 at 5:36 pm |

            It’s not that it is very complicated & I understand your time is limited. 
            I too have much to do.  There is no need to impose a time limit.
            If you do the above, I will do the same and I promise you that we will compare notes and make a presentation of it in an article for Disinfo.  Does that sound fair?  Given our history of mutual conflict I believe that such a coming together in a mutual effort to share knowledge would in fact be ‘leading by example’.

          • Shoot me an email and we can figure out how this might work.  It would be nice if we all can learn to work together.  We are not each other’s enemies, I’m sure we have much more in common than different and commend your effort to create something together that might serve everyone in understanding the machinations of the control system.    You can reach me at  Cheers.

          • Justkidding | Sep 17, 2012 at 6:15 pm |

            Time to sell email to the highestof bidders. Let the spam begins 

          • If you can understand whats going on here, then you can understand what calypso is talking about:


             It’s not vague advice, its just the maximum amount of information that can be given without a working understanding of the subject matter.

          • Talk about a false dichotomy.

          • Not false, just loose; take the similarities and leave the rest.

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 19, 2012 at 12:25 am |

            Camron, please take this as a kind observation. At least as conveyed through communication on this site your thought process seems primarily to be composed of binary oppositions –
            Which is frustrating when attempting to convey information that may best be interpreted through a more integral framework.  Just a thought.  Peace.

          • Would you consider that just as good an introduction to information theory to someone who knows a good bit of signal processing? or do you know of something better?

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 17, 2012 at 8:31 pm |

            Signals processing can cover a lot of ground.  Could you give me a little of your background in it, along with mathematics level & programming skills? Also some of your comments seem to indicate involvement in the biosciences.  There is really cool crossover in biosystems theory, that’s where I do most of my reading.  At a fundamental level information theory has been incorporated already into these disciplines.  If you were to read a basic book you’d probably see an abstraction of principles you’d already encountered. 

          • I was mostly aimed towards biomedical device design, and I stumbled into EEG Audio evoked potentials (but I sortof gained a distaste for that particular application, I like understanding things in a bottom up way, and EEG doesn’t lend itself to that).

            In any case I mostly dealt with OP AMPs and simple filters in the analog realm, and much the same through MATLAB as my “programming” platform, but for personal interest i guess, I took some of the more intermediate level signal processing courses from the electrical engineering department. oh right, and some digital image processing as well.

          • Calypso_1 | Sep 17, 2012 at 9:49 pm |

            Well with your background I’d recommend going to the Godfather of the field itself Claude Shannon and read The Mathematical Theory of Communication ISBN-13: 978-0252725487.
            As far as things more related to engineering and DSP, I can’t recommend based on personal readings but if you want a crossover that I think you could follow that would take you deeper into the neurosciences and help with that ‘understanding from the bottom up’, try these:
            Dynamical Systems in Neuroscience: The Geometry of Excitability and Bursting ISBN-13: 978-0262514200
            Theoretical Neuroscience: Computational and Mathematical Modeling of Neural Systems ISBN-13: 978-0262541855

          • Awesome, thanks. This is good stuff.

  5. Yahaboobay | Sep 16, 2012 at 5:16 pm |

    Ha!  This is what Niel Stephenson described as going “gargoyle”.  Awesome.

Comments are closed.