And there are options. Reflectivity is your friend if you so choose.
Flock Cameras
- Thread starter Scoop123
- Start date
I don't get this thinking? Over 80 towns and cities, including Los Angeles, Denver, and Austin have rejected, let expire, or actively terminated their Flock camera agreements due to public pushback.
I'm not suggesting people become activist and march in the streets. Nah. But this one seems like there some clear paths that people have successfully done already. You attend a City Council meeting, or attend a Police Commissioner meeting if it came from them. The State legislature is another choice.
The ACLU has a campaign to "Get the Flock out" I'm not saying it's easy, but throwing up our hands on an issue that is not even legislated into law seems pretty surrender-ish (new word! lol).
Big problem in Palm Beach County.. vandals are cutting down the poles with electric angle grinders thankfully.
There is no expectation of privacy in the public. You are being watched, recorded, and tracked everywhere you go.
Missing the point. I don't expect my license plate to be private or what shirt I'm wearing in public. The issue is not about being watched in public - the issue is what they do with the information they are gathering. This is the slippery slope problem. People shrug and say the cameras are fine. Then ONE guy in the city mandates they buy the cameras. They are installed without restrictions, laws or ordinances and the abuse flows. This is a major flaw and problem with these cameras just getting put on a pole and telling the public to deal with it..
The abuse has already been documented and is widespread. Some people throw up their hands and act like "oh well, cameras are in the public so everything is fair game" and then are surprised or care or don't pay attention when government officials and police are running queries without any cause at all. There is stalking, random searching, following people, etc, all sorts of BS going on.
Yes, abuse will always happen. There are some guardrails already in place, and we know that because abusers have been punished (officers fired, etc.). I am for expanding that punishment to be both civil and criminal if it isn't already...I honesetly don't know. Transparancy is key. For example, I would be interested in a system similar to unclaimed property in which you can query your name and information to see all executed searches about you or your property. Or the inverse, in which the entity that executed the search is required to notify you (of course, after any investigation is over, etc.).
I get your point but as I understand it. It’s a public space and anyone can video anyone else for anything at any time in a public space.
My biggest worry regarding flock or any other kind of camera is that they'll catch me taking a pull on that 25 ouncer on my way home from a mountain bike adventure at Platte. I fear they gonna do like Target, and wait till it totals a certain amount, then move in for the kill.. gonna be hard to plead not guilty whey they show me 36 photographs of me actually doin it.
The point you’re missing is that privacy isn’t about having something to hide. It’s about not wanting a permanent, searchable record of where you go every day sitting in a database that thousands of agencies can query.
“I have nothing to hide” assumes the only people who need privacy are criminals, and that today’s rules will always govern the data. That’s not how these systems work. Flock doesn’t just check plates against a hot list and delete the rest. It logs every car, stores the data, and makes movement patterns searchable across a national network. Once that infrastructure exists, the uses expand. That’s the part people keep glossing over.
What kind of batteries do you thinks those have ? Not what you think. If they’re always on then they’re always pinging with the server. They might last an hour
Stalking romantic partners: A Milwaukee internal affairs investigation revealed an officer used the department's Flock system to track his romantic partner 124 times and the partner's ex 55 times
Retaliatory tracking: An investigator who worked on that very stalking case was later arrested after he admitted to using the Flock system to track citizens and secretly install a GPS device on a vehicle.
Holiday Hills, Illinois: In June 2026, the local police chief was arrested and hit with felony misconduct charges after prosecutors found he used the Flock Safety system to stalk three women he had been in romantic relationships with. He also ran the license plate of one woman's ex-boyfriend 140 times
Sedgwick, Kansas: The town's police chief resigned and lost his law enforcement certification after admitting he used the regional Flock database to track his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend for over four months
Kechi, Kansas: A police lieutenant was convicted of unlawful use of computers and sentenced to probation after he used neighboring Wichita's Flock database to stalk his estranged wife. The abuse only stopped because the wife grew suspicious and reported her fears to the police
Costa Mesa, California: An officer who was placed on administrative leave continued to access the Flock Safetynetwork to track and locate his mistress
Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina: In late July 2026, Officer Seth Elliot was arrested following a state investigation revealing he had misused state intelligence data and the Flock Safety network to track vehicles in order to tip off and aid an active criminal suspect
That enough?
Last edited:
So it looks like there are checks already in place for this
I would suggest everyone watch this . Ben Jordon has been investigating Flock camera's security.
It's titled
We Hacked Flock Safety Cameras in under 30 Seconds
Here's a link (it's disturbing)