- Flock cameras have been vandalized in several states.
- Critics point to privacy risks and ICE data access fears.
- Dozens of cities have paused or rejected contracts.
Flock Safety cameras are becoming a hot topic. The brand is far from the only automatic license plate reader (ALPR) company, but it’s one of the most popular, with the company saying its systems are in use in more than 6,000 communities nationwide. Over the last few months, some in those communities have used violence to make their feelings heard.
Flock does far more than just capture pictures of license plates. It takes photos of entire cars and then uses image data from the vehicle to tie it to the license plate it captures. Have an unusual dent on your car? How about a bumper sticker? Flock can link those things to your car, and by extension, you. Law enforcement can access the same data, and it can be widely shared.
A Growing Flashpoint In Local Communities
Privacy advocates say this is a clear violation of the Fourth Amendment, and some courts agree with that stance. To that end, some have ruled that the photos Flock takes are public information, given that they include every vehicle and person that drives by, regardless of whether they’re suspected of a crime. Now, some citizens are taking matters into their own hands.
More: Why More Cities Are Suddenly Pulling The Plug On Flock Safety Cameras
According to Brian Merchant at Blood in the Machine, residents in multiple states are destroying cameras. In La Mesa, California, at least two Flock cameras were recently vandalized. One was cut down and smashed in the median along Fletcher Parkway, while another had key components removed. The damage came weeks after the city council voted to continue its Flock contract, despite vocal public opposition.
Similar incidents have been reported in Oregon, Illinois, Connecticut, and Virginia. In Eugene and Springfield, Oregon, at least six cameras were cut down last year. In Virginia, a man was arrested and charged after allegedly destroying 13 cameras across the state, later claiming he acted out of concern for Fourth Amendment protections.
Mapping project DeFlock estimates that there are nearly 80,000 ALPR cameras nationwide. According to Tech Crunch, dozens of cities, including Santa Cruz, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View, Richmond, Staunton, Flagstaff, and Eugene, have paused or ended contracts with Flock or similar providers. What’s happening here seems to be a small but growing wave of resistance against these types of cameras.
Supporters Cite Crime Solving Benefit
As Merchant points out, finding support online for the vandals isn’t exactly hard. One recent Reddit commenter said of the scofflaws, “Do they have a gofundme for baseball bats or anything?” Another said “Some stories just make me smile.”
As we’ve covered several times, ALPR cameras aren’t without their supporters. They’ve undoubtedly aided in capturing suspects of serious crimes. That doesn’t absolve them of the known and verifiable issues with their installation and continued use. What happens from this point forward is anyone’s guess.
