Originally Posted By lygxis:
https://www.thedrive.com/news/flock-ceo-claims-its-cameras-arent-a-constitutional-violation-cut-and-dry




Notice how he flat out avoids that privacy isn't tracking, and that privacy is one of the smaller things?

Also, the "well the constitution is what the courts say."  (implied: "suck it plebes, we can influence the judges, you can't).

So much for "It means what the text meant when it was written."

"Default retention" - yesss, and we noticed in the transparency portals people retain the data for more than that, one of them up to 1000+ days.

Also, do tell everyone how "well we only take your information we couldn't get without you without your consent or knowledge and hold it for thirty days" makes it ok?

Do you even know what reasoning is? Or did the $$$$ drive that out of your skull?



Hmm. I suspect IBM would have uttered the same lines during the late 30s and the ww2 era.

Originally Posted By Xyster7212:
PDs are all over Facebook whining about it and getting hammered in the comments.

Originally Posted By Extorris:

The comments on Henry County's post were hilarious.

But bad actors have used this massive camera network as a powerful weapon for intimate surveillance. Authorities have charged or accused at least 50 law-enforcement officers of using license-plate readers for unauthorized purposes, including to stalk women without their knowledge or consent, a Post analysis of police and court records found.

In 26 of these cases, police investigators and prosecutors said the officers used the technology to spy on their wives, their girlfriends, their exes, their exes’ new partners or women they wanted to meet. In other cases, police or prosecutors have not specified the alleged surveillance targets. Flock’s system was used in 46 of the cases analyzed by The Post, while the other cases involved competing products.
Many of the plate-reader misuse cases were previously covered by local media outlets, and some were first compiled by the Institute for Justice, a civil liberties law firm in Arlington, Virginia.

The Post reviewed thousands of pages of court documents and internal police reports and conducted interviews with seven alleged victims, some of whom spoke publicly for the first time, to paint a comprehensive picture of the misuse of Flock and other license-plate readers by police officers around the country.

The review found that Flock gave police departments wide latitude about whether to activate settings that some police and privacy advocates argue could deter misconduct, and that many departments conducted limited oversight of their officers’ searches. As a result, rogue police were able to monitor their subjects’ movements with precision and secrecy.

West Virginia’s Freedom Caucus is renewing its push to ban Flock AI-powered surveillance cameras statewide, arguing that automated license plate readers, facial recognition systems, and other government monitoring tools violate Americans’ constitutional right to privacy.

The caucus is calling for the removal of Flock Safety license plate readers and the passage of the Fourth Amendment Restoration Act, legislation that would prohibit a broad range of AI-powered surveillance technologies from being used by law enforcement and other government agencies.

A BILL to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding a new article, designated §15-17-1, §15-17-2, §15-17-3, §15-17-4, §15-17-5, and §15-17-6; relating to public safety; prohibiting law-enforcement officers and political subdivision officials from utilizing certain surveillance and artificial intelligence technologies; setting forth legislative findings and short title; creating criminal penalties; and creating a private cause of action.

Be it enacted by the Legislature of West Virginia:


Chaper 15. Public Safety.
Article 17. Fourth Amendment Restoration Act.
§15-17-1. Short Title.

This article shall be known as the "Fourth Amendment Restoration Act".

...therefore, the Legislature finds and declares that law enforcement's use of certain technological innovations in surveillance and artificial intelligence are inherently unreasonable and unconstitutional.

Use of the following technologies by law enforcement constitutes unreasonable searches and may not be used by any law-enforcement officer or any person for law enforcement purposes unless a warrant has been issued authorizing such use against a specific person based upon probable cause:

(a) Real Time Security monitoring;

(b) Multimodal vehicle recognition;

(c) Facial recognition;

(d) Gun or firearm recognition;

(e) Surveillance drones;

(f) License plate readers; and

(g) Digital identity ecosystems.

§15-17-4. Penalties

(a) Any law-enforcement officer or political subdivision official who, by any means, knowingly and willfully utilizes any of the technologies prohibited by §15-17-3 of this code is guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be confined in a correctional facility for not less than one year and one day and fined not less than $10,000 per occurrence.

(b) No political subdivisions in this state may implement or utilize any of the technologies prohibited by §15-17-3 of this code, and any political subdivision that has implemented or utilized any such technologies prior to passage of this article must immediately discontinue such implementation or use. Any political subdivision official who refuses to comply with this subsection shall be guilty of a felony and, upon conviction thereof, shall be confined in a correctional facility for not less than one year and one day and fined not less than $10,000 per occurrence.
§15-17-5. Private cause of action.

Any person whose rights have been violated by a law-enforcement officer or political subdivision official's use of any of the technologies prohibited by §15-17-3 of this code shall have a private cause of action against the offending officer or official.

Originally Posted By M4-AK:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2-bxmWOH4U

Just released. Trex labs.

Cliff Notes... The RF detection database may eventually replace their car tag needs.

HAMILTON, Ohio — Two automated license plate reading cameras were cut down on Boyle road. According to police, the cameras, which are sold by the company Flock, are used to track license plates on passing vehicles.

The AI-powered cameras, located in the Long Island East End town of Southold, were targeted amid a wave of anti-Flock backlash featuring similar kinds of vandalism that is sweeping the country, Southold Police Chief Steve Grattan confirmed to The Post.

“We had two cameras vandalized on July 4 weekend — both had paint splattered on them and one had the wires unplugged,” Grattan said.
“This past Monday evening, one of the cameras was run over by a vehicle and another had the wires unplugged,” he added.  

404 Media has obtained a coaching guide that Flock surveillance gives to police about “how to speak to city councils about public safety technology.” The handbook highlights how Flock and police team up to convince cities to buy and keep its automated license plate reader technology, even when there is widespread public opposition to it, and encourages police to “own the narrative before someone else does” by championing the technology before citizens can oppose it during public comment periods.

The PDF guide notes that the general public and cities now “increasingly expect transparency, oversight, and accountability alongside public safety outcomes,” and tells police to not argue with people who believe that Flock’s license plate readers are “mass surveillance.”

“One of the most common questions agencies hear today is whether license plate recognition (LPR) technology constitutes mass surveillance. Many leaders instinctively respond by attempting to refute the claim. Flock's Jamie Hudson recommends a different approach,” the guide reads.

“Don’t avoid the concept of mass surveillance because you’re not going to convince opponents that it’s not,” the company recommends. Flock tells law enforcement agencies they need to try to convince city council and city managers that the technology is worthwhile before meetings with the public occur; that they need to have a “carefully scripted presentation” ready to go; and that police need to say they want Flock because they want to keep the community safe: “You care about your community. That’s why you’re bringing this in.”

Originally Posted By lygxis:


The document they linked in the text quoted above:

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/28531454-flockbook/



Click To View Spoiler

For the talking point that it's tied to legitimite investigations.

First, kill flock's talking point category entirely here (because it's false from the start).

Investigations originating from (sine qua non) mass surveillance stand on the idea that mass surveillance is acceptable as practice. Without the mass surveillance you couldn't have flock.

(cornerstone of the point).

That also means that in cases originating outside of mass surveillance if any evidence is brought in BY the use of M.S., that evidence (however it's used and whatever weight it carries) is irrevocably based on M.S., and is thus tracking everyone ...

(likely good to point out that expecting privacy in public is not the same as expecting to not be tracked in public,  and then a quick verbal jab at the false idea that "well it's just one location/picture/video/audio capture/signals capture, means it can't be tracking or useful to it - cant' have a brick wall without individual bricks)

... thusly, refusing to let them hide from mass surveillance inherent to their very systems and ideas.

Point out in explicit terms that if they are willing to accept mass surveillance for evidence, they have to accept it everywhere it would apply elsewhere - including against the government people who want to use M.S. on us.


Simply: investigations that are orignated from mass surveillance are not legitimate, and evidence from it is not legitimate, and it's not legitimate because it's based on treating everyone like a criminal for no good or valid reason (only those we know to be criminals deserve this sort of surveillance, and for that matter, only certain kinds of criminals deserve it).


After that? https://www.flockreports.com/   A site listing with sources how cops and others misuse mass surveillance. Have fun.

-----------------------------

On retention policies:

https://eyesonflock.com/


AT the site, scroll down, and you can see the listed data regention. Cranbury and green brook NJ list data retention at 1095 days.  37 of jsut the ones listed have retention of more than 30 days. You might also ask what retention means and what they do with the data after that and if the data is allowed to be copied. A mild verbal jab about "if we stalked you for 30 days the way this network does, how much of YOUR life would we have a map of?"

-----------------------------

On "you care about your community"

"I care" does not mean "therefore I have the right to do (anything)."

Any of a near infinite number of examples can be given on the fly from the talker. "I care that you take my taxmoney, therefore I have the right to empty your (look at pols and bureucrats present) bank accounts to get my money back. No? Don't that just because I care I don't have the right to do that? Especially without your consent?   (pause)  well, the same applies to you and to flock.

(possibly insert cs lews quote about moral busybody tyrants)

-----------------------------


who controls the system?

Flock ultimately does, that's who. show the pos and bureucrats how cities have had to fight just to get flock taken down (you can find examples in this thread).

-----------------------------

Who can access it?

Anyone who flock sells to that has enough money, that's who:

https://substack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com/public/images/830b618e-8fc3-4d83-8367-c7f05f70cb36_1013x678.png

-----------------------------

How is information used?

As a stalking service for people who can't take no for an answer, that's how. Or at best by busybodies.

Added: Reportedly mass surveillance sucks at it's advertised anti-crime usage:

https://www.businessinsider.com/flock-camera-misread-license-plate-reader-california-roseville-police-2026-7

-----------------------------


How is use reviewed?

Not well enough (see abuses cited earlier) and the point out how this is not "find good enough people" but rather "humans can't be trusted with this" and if you want, mention somthing like the joke about the simpson episode "to surveil with love" and compare people to ned flanders in that episode.

-----------------------------

What safeguards help ensure policies are followed?


Give them a good dead level stare and tell them to ask if the departments can turn off or in any way curtail the software from enforcing policies.

---------------------------

Proably good to follow up with information from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY

and maybe:

https://i.redd.it/qiq98hczb7hh1.jpeg

Every Flock license plate reader camera operated by the Winona Police Department has been sawed off and stolen in what investigators believe was a coordinated theft.

Each camera is valued at approximately $3,000, putting the total loss at roughly $24,000. That cost falls directly on the Winona Police Department's budget.

Three Coweta County Sheriff's Office employees have resigned after an internal audit flagged their use of the department's Flock Safety camera system, prompting the agency to request an independent investigation by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation.

According to the sheriff's office, routine auditing tools used to monitor employee access to law enforcement technology identified several accounts that required additional administrative review.

Department leaders met with three employees to discuss their use of the Flock Safety system. During those meetings, each employee chose to resign before the audit process was completed and before an internal investigation could begin.

Originally Posted By Extorris:
Georgia again.

https://www.fox5atlanta.com/news/3-coweta-sheriffs-employees-resign-amid-flock-review

Lancaster, New York now has DRONE flock cameras that fly over your houses.

`The Lancaster Police Department is going to start using the drone flock cameras in starting in September. It will only be tested the first few months, but the Lancaster Bee says that the police will have a way that residents can see when and where they will be flown at the very least, during the test flights.

Stanford University has terminated its contract with Flock Safety, a company whose license plate cameras have prompted backlash from privacy advocates across the nation.

The university announced Tuesday that it has ended its agreement with Flock and has replaced the Flock system with one that does not allow data to be accessible by any third party, according to the Stanford Report, a university publication. In making the switch, Stanford is joining a growing number of jurisdictions that have either ditched Flock in recent months or have added new restrictions.

“The new system does not have third-party access built into the architecture,” Dunkley said. “It’s a tool for Stanford’s Department of Public Safety to investigate specific incidents on our campus, not a system that could be connected to a broader network.”

NC Cop Exposed an Undercover Officer Using Flock's Database

How a favor for an old friend collapsed a months-long undercover drug operation.

A Charlotte officer ran a license plate as a favor for a friend, unknowingly exposing an undercover detective involved in a drug investigation.
The lookup allowed the target to identify and confront the undercover officer, instantly collapsing months of investigative work.
The incident highlights how easily Flock’s surveillance data can be accessed without oversight, with misuse only discovered after harm is done.

A Charlotte officer ran a license plate as a favor for a friend, unknowingly exposing an undercover detective involved in a drug investigation.
The lookup allowed the target to identify and confront the undercover officer, instantly collapsing months of investigative work.
The incident highlights how easily Flock’s surveillance data can be accessed without oversight, with misuse only discovered after harm is done.

Mooresville Police Department Police chief Ron Campurciani said Snowman used it 31 times to track her boyfriend’s ex-wife. Two of those times she was off-duty.

REYNOLDSBURG, Ohio (WSYX) — Two Reynoldsburg police officers resigned after the department launched separate Internal Affairs investigations into their alleged use of the department's Flock Safety automated license plate reader system.

Records obtained by ABC 6 show investigators questioned whether Officers Mark Nichols and Alissa Birkhimer repeatedly searched the same license plates without a legitimate law-enforcement purpose. Both officers resigned before they were scheduled to be interviewed by investigators.

According to Internal Affairs records, a routine audit conducted by Lt. Kevin McDonnell found Nichols searched the Flock Safety database for the same Ohio license plate 27 times between May 25 and June 11, 2026, while he was on non-disciplinary administrative leave because of a medical diagnosis.

The searches did not include the required case number, instead listing "23," a Reynoldsburg police code for an errand, as the reason for the search.

Investigators expanded the audit to review Nichols' Flock activity from September 1, 2025, through June 17, 2026. That review found:

   19 searches for the same plate in December 2025
   12 searches in May 2026
   16 searches in June 2026

The investigation ultimately concluded Nichols conducted 47 unauthorized searches, including 46 involving a vehicle investigators determined belonged to a person identified in his personnel records as his former domestic partner.

Mooresville police officer accused of using Flock cameras to track boyfriend's ex-wife

MOORESVILLE, N.C. (WBTV) - A Mooresville police officer on Wednesday was accused of accessing Flock Safety for personal reasons.

On Wednesday, Aug. 5, Chief Ron Campurciani said that officer Elizabeth Snowman accessed Flock Cameras 31 times for personal use. Chief Campurciani said that Snowman used the Flock cameras to get information on and track her boyfriend's ex-wife.

Mooresville police said that of the 31 times that Snowman used Flock cameras two of them happened when she was off-duty. Officials said officer Snowman was also untruthful as to why she accessed the system.

An arrest warrant said that Snowman allegedly accessed Flock cameras to get info on her boyfriend's ex-wife's vehicle.

Mooresville police said that they do an audit of the license plate readers every 30 days. Officers have to put in a reason why they access Flock cameras.

Chief said of the 31 searches, 29 of them were motor vehicle infractions and the other two were listed as burglary or robbery.

On Aug. 5 charged with accessing computers she got a $5,000 secured bond into the Iredell County Detention Center.

Chief Campurciani said that they are looking to at least 10 other cases involving officers and Flock Cameras. Of the 10 the chief said that three of them are problematic.

"I don't think we are done yet quite frankly," Chief Campurciani said. "So, we're looking at other ones that could turnout to be nothing, but there are certain ones that we're taking a secondary look at, a deep look at."

Snowman was hired in January 2025. Chief Campurciani said that she still currently employed and up to human resources if she is fired. She was scheduled to work and was arrested when she started her shift.

Charlotte police officer arrested for alleged Flock Safety misuse accused of giving information to 'drug target'

CHARLOTTE, N.C. (WBTV) - A Charlotte-Mecklenburg police officer who was arrested this week allegedly used Flock Safety and other technology to help someone involved in a drug investigation, documents revealed.

An affidavit filled out by a special agent with the North Carolina State Bureau of Investigation said the officer -- 25-year-old Seth Daniel Elliott -- was contacted by a "drug target" on June 16, 2026.

The document alleged that the "target" asked Elliott to search for the license plate registration for a vehicle being used by an undercover officer.

The affidavit said that at the time of the request, the target was the subject of a drug investigation that was initiated by the Watauga County Sheriff's Office in North Carolina.

Elliott allegedly queried the undercover officer's license plate information using the Flock Safety system and a database called "CJLEADS." He was then accused of giving that information to the target.

Elliott was then arrested on Wednesday, July 29, and was charged with illegally accessing a government computer.

The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department put Elliott on unpaid administrative leave following his arrest.

Originally Posted By Cobalt135:
Not only stalking, but helping drug dealers by giving them info on where the Detectives car has been....
CHARLOTTE, N.C.
https://www.wbtv.com/2026/07/30/arrested-charlotte-mecklenburg-police-officer-accused-giving-information-investigation-target/

Originally Posted By crazymike1973:

I think I’m on the RIGHT side of this along with @GlennJacobsTN https://t.co/gE0vVA0jF7

Tim Burchett  (@timburchett) August 6, 2026

BREAKING:  Lead investor behind Flock Camera Technologies caught funding a firm that is able to locate, hack, and ALTER both live and archived security camera footage without a detectable trace.

Guess who he is also linked to... https://t.co/HexoxsMkGW

Douglas Macgregor  (@DougAMacgregor) August 6, 2026

Hopefully Burchett and Kane can de-flock TN.

Originally Posted By lygxis:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TOfK-w6mSnw
These people who show up in this from flock could play the joker or harley quinn, they are just that bad.

Originally Posted By crazymike1973:

I think I’m on the RIGHT side of this along with @GlennJacobsTN https://t.co/gE0vVA0jF7

Tim Burchett  (@timburchett) August 6, 2026

BREAKING:  Lead investor behind Flock Camera Technologies caught funding a firm that is able to locate, hack, and ALTER both live and archived security camera footage without a detectable trace.

Guess who he is also linked to... https://t.co/HexoxsMkGW

Douglas Macgregor  (@DougAMacgregor) August 6, 2026

Hopefully Burchett and Kane can de-flock TN.

Originally Posted By AR-1556:
Ok so a gun store can order a flock camera to be positioned on the opposite side of their road (which I assume they don't own)?


Can anyone order one of these things? Maybe somebody should use one of flocks competitors and position a camera pointed at the flock HQ...

Originally Posted By AR-1556:
Ok so a gun store can order a flock camera to be positioned on the opposite side of their road (which I assume they don't own)?


Can anyone order one of these things? Maybe somebody should use one of flocks competitors and position a camera pointed at the flock HQ...

Originally Posted By Cobalt135:
That is pretty targeted surveillance.  Gun shop, Diesel shop, and a house for sale.  Dead end.....