6 comments

  • atmavatar 11 minutes ago

        "Over 1,200 vendors had access to our information through the Flock system," Steinmetz said, adding he did not know the identities of all those entities.
    
    Even if for some strange reason you're OK with the police having access to the surveillance data (despite multiple recent articles revealing abuse), I'd like to think most people would take issue with random third parties also having access to it.

    Flock cameras and their ilk are not OK in a civilized, free society.

  • neom 0 minutes ago
    "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."

    https://archive.is/fxZWT

  • thangalin 35 minutes ago
  • aussieguy1234 31 minutes ago
    There are multiple cases of people being falsely imprisoned because police believed Flock over actual evidence. In each case Flock was wrong.
    • tptacek 21 minutes ago
      Can you cite some of them? You'd be looking for cases where it's Flock at fault, not where police simply decided to look for the wrong car (like: "any black Honda CR-V that passed this intersection at 10AM").
      • ceejayoz 20 minutes ago
        https://www.riaclu.org/news/flock-safety-image-led-to-false-...

        https://reason.com/2026/08/13/flock-cameras-and-license-plat...

        https://katv.com/news/local/sherwood-stop-sparked-after-floc...

        For the edit specifically: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/11/human-toll-alpr-errors

        > Turns out that the ALPR had misread a ‘3’ as a ‘7’ on Green’s license plate. But what is even more egregious is that none of the officers bothered to double-check the ALPR tip before acting on it.

        • tptacek 16 minutes ago
          Thanks! Reading now.
          • tptacek 8 minutes ago
            The third of these is exactly what I'm looking for: a case where a Flock camera was off by one letter, and mismatched a car as stolen when it wasn't. The driver wasn't arrested, but being stopped for a stolen vehicle is terrifying --- it happened several times where I live as well (due to stale Illinois LEADS entries).

            The first two don't seem like Flock issues at all.

            In the first, police used Flock cameras as they would have a closed-circuit camera. They got a vague look at the person driving a suspect car, and they got another lead on the owner of the car, tracked him down on Facebook, and picked out a person from his friends list that looked like the picture on the camera.

            In the second, there was a fatal hit-and-run accident involving a Dodge Durango; the police did a dragnet search for Dodges Durango and literally picked the first one they could find parked on the street. They then papered the case backwards to match it to the accident, claiming it had telltale damage (it did not).

            Both those cases are police malfeasance, to be sure. But they're not the police believing Flock against all other evidence; they're police essentially manufacturing evidence to clear a case.

            • slowin 4 minutes ago
              How are they not Flock issues? If Flock cameras didn't exist, they wouldn't have happened. Flocks (and all other mass surveillance cameras) allow many parties to violate your rights and generally behave sociopathically. This is why people want them all removed.
  • e2le 57 minutes ago
    Isn't it a bit disingenuous to refer to them as merely license plate readers?
    • esalman 1 minute ago
      They're not, according to "Authorities".

      > Authorities believe the at-large criminals snuck up behind the cameras with spray foam canisters and sprayed the lenses before the cameras had a chance to ID them.

      https://www.facebook.com/100064614555569/posts/1467922555371...

    • lemoncookiechip 38 minutes ago
      Cop-issued spousal trackers. 50 cases and counting.
      • ceejayoz 28 minutes ago
        50 known cases.

        edit: https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2026/08/19/we-foun...

        > At least 69 police officials have been accused, charged with or convicted of misusing Flock’s system or other license-plate readers for unauthorized purposes, The Post has found, and in at least 15 of these cases, someone outside of the police department — including victims, activists and journalists — first identified the potential misuse.

        > Records and interviews show that departments across the country do not regularly audit their officers’ Flock use, a practice recommended by the company, and some law enforcement agencies have no formal training programs or written policies describing how the technology should be used.

        • lemoncookiechip 25 minutes ago
          Exactly. One cop used it to track his almost 800 times in a few months.
  • arkhiver 1 hour ago
    They will just switch to Axon