Full transcript
Flock Safety cameras were just credited
with the tracking down and arrest of
this child abduction suspect in Wake
County, North Carolina. But why are so
many Americans outraged by the cameras
to the point where cities are suddenly
boycotting them and some citizens doing
everything in their power to stop them?
I want these cameras off.
It comes as more and more drivers in the
US are finding out that they're being
surveilled, whether or not they're
suspected of committing a crime.
The controversial cameras that are being
used in the widespread surveillance and
which now blanket the country have
sparked heated outrage, even leading to
online movements dedicated to destroying
the rising technology.
Tens of thousands of automated license
plate readers or ALPRs have popped up in
cities and towns nationwide. The
cameras, which are promoted for making
us safer, capture images and log the
details of every passing vehicle,
including license plates, dents, bumper
stickers, and roof [music] racks
before sharing the information to a vast
database with law enforcement agencies
and other organizations like businesses,
schools, and HOAs.
The largest company at the center of
this fast-growing technology, Flock
Safety, has drawn intense criticism over
concerns of invasion of privacy.
As more Americans start to take notice
and public outrage grows, a new bill has
been proposed to strip federal funding
from any local governments or police
departments that deploy the
controversial security cameras.
The bill, announced by Representative
Thomas Massie, was introduced in an
effort to strengthen the Fourth
Amendment, [music] which protects
against unreasonable searches and
government surveillance. The Kentucky
Republican wrote on X, "I'll soon be
sponsoring a bill to withhold federal
money from municipalities and police
departments that deploy Flock and
other-style cameras to surveil
law-abiding citizens."
Flock has quietly become law
enforcement's go-to surveillance tool
around the country and has already wired
itself into more than 5,000 [music]
police agencies nationwide with nearly
90,000 cameras since 2018, according to
EFF
an activist group tracking the company's
surveillance and expansion.
Flock has said that the cameras are a
vital tool in helping modern-day police
solve crimes, recover stolen vehicles,
locate gunshots, track fleeing suspects,
and issue Amber alerts.
But critics claim that the cameras serve
as the local government's Big Brother
style mass surveillance with billions of
monthly plate reads flowing into police
databases shared across agencies each
month.
The outrage has caused cities across the
country concerned with data sharing to
deactivate the cameras or terminate
their contracts with Flock, such as Los
Angeles, California, Madison, Wisconsin,
and Syracuse, New York.
And for cities who do use Flock cameras,
some locals are making their opinions
known like this St. Petersburg resident
who sits in a lawn chair holding a 14-ft
tall sign to block the views of cameras
around the Florida city.
I basically sit on a a nice comfortable
chair
and I have a Oh, it's a 14-ft uh pole
that I can raise up and put in front of
the camera. Down with Flock cameras
written on it, so that's what the Flock
camera see.
There's also been a growing movement of
anti-Flock vigilantes across the country
vandalizing the cameras in their
hometowns.
Flock Safety has acknowledged public
concerns over privacy and claim
safeguards are implemented to ensure
accountability for use of the
technology.
The company also estimates it has
supported more than 1 million
investigations, assisted in 20% of all
solved cases in jurisdictions that
partner with it, and has helped [music]
locate more than 10,000 missing people
to date.
A spokesperson for Flock Safety [music]
told The Post that Massie's bill would
have real consequences for public
safety.
We do not have to choose between
protecting privacy and giving law
enforcement the tools it needs to keep
communities safe. The representative
added, "We can and should do both."