When Flock Surveillance Comes to Your Town: Everything to Know About These Cameras
Flock Safety is setting up cams and drones around the country. Here's why communities are fighting back and exactly how this technology works.
- Flock Safety has installed over 200,000 cameras across 4,000+ U.S. communities as of 2025, with no federal oversight on data retention or use.
- At least 52 cities—including Berkeley, CA; Portland, OR; and Somerville, MA—have voted to ban or restrict Flock cameras since 2023, citing Fourth Amendment violations.
- A 2024 ACLU analysis found that Flock's license plate readers generate false matches for 1 in 5 searches, disproportionately flagging vehicles registered in predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.
- Flock's base subscription costs $2,500 per camera per year, with additional fees for analytics features like vehicle classification and search filters; some small towns spend over $100,000 annually.
- In 2024, a Colorado judge ruled that Flock data obtained without a warrant was inadmissible in a hit-and-run case, setting a legal precedent that could ripple across states.
Frequently Asked Questions
Flock Safety is a private company that sells automated license plate readers (ALPRs), cameras, and drones to law enforcement and communities. Its cameras capture images of every vehicle that passes, recording license plate numbers, vehicle features, and timestamps. The data is stored in the cloud and can be searched by police departments.
Flock cameras are typically mounted on poles or street signs and use solar power. They capture high-resolution images of license plates within a 100-foot range, along with vehicle make, model, color, and distinguishing features like roof racks or bumper stickers. The data is uploaded to Flock's cloud platform, where it is stored for 30 days by default. Police can set up alerts for specific plates or run historical searches.
Cities cite privacy violations, lack of transparency, and concerns about mass surveillance. Critics argue that continuous recording of every passing vehicle violates the Fourth Amendment's protection against unreasonable searches. There are also worries about data accuracy, racial bias, and the potential for misuse, such as tracking protesters or journalists without a warrant.
As of early 2025, at least 52 U.S. municipalities have voted to remove or restrict Flock cameras. This includes cities like Berkeley (CA), Portland (OR), Somerville (MA), and smaller towns such as Maplewood (MO) and Yellow Springs (OH). The number is growing as more communities learn the cameras were installed without public consent.
The legality is being tested in court. In 2024, a Colorado judge ruled that Flock data obtained without a warrant was inadmissible in a criminal case. Other states have varying laws regarding automated license plate readers. Flock's terms of service require police to have a valid law enforcement purpose, but critics say the mass collection of data inherently violates privacy protections.
The primary concern is that Flock cameras collect data on every passing vehicle, not just those suspected of a crime. This creates a searchable database of everyone's movements. Privacy advocates worry about function creep (using data for purposes beyond its original intent), data breaches, and the chilling effect on free association and assembly. Additionally, studies have shown that false positive matches disproportionately affect minority communities.
Topics
Original source
www.cnet.com
Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to post a comment or reply.
No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts!