Stop Flock

What Are Flock Cameras?

Flock Safety markets its devices as "AI-powered precision policing technology" - far beyond basic license plate readers (ALPRs) (Flock Safety). The system uses AI to create a "Vehicle Fingerprint" - identifying cars not only by license plate, but also by color, make and model, roof racks, dents/damage, wheel type, and more. Even bumper sticker placement is analyzed. This lets law enforcement search for a "blue sedan with damage on the left side" even without a license plate.

But the surveillance goes deeper. Using a feature called "Convoy Analysis", the system can detect vehicles that frequently appear near each other - suggesting associations between drivers or accomplices. The platform can also flag vehicles that routinely travel to the same locations across time. Flock describes this as a way to "identify suspect vehicles traveling together" or "pinpoint associates" - functionality confirmed in both their marketing and police testimonials (GovTech, ACLU).

The data is logged and made searchable across a nationwide law enforcement network - which officers in subscribing agencies can access without a warrant. According to Flock, the system can automatically flag a vehicle based on its history, route, or presence in multiple locations linked to a crime (Flock HOA Marketing).

While these tools may aid in locating stolen cars or missing persons, they also create a detailed record of everyone's movements, associations, and routines. That data has already been misused - like when a Kansas police chief used Flock cameras 228 times to stalk an ex-girlfriend and her new partner without cause (Local12).

How Widespread Are These Cameras?

The map below shows just a fraction of current Flock camera installations around NW Chicago. These points are a better reflection of where the person tagging often drives than they are a representation of how many there actually are.

Almost all of these have been installed since 2020; these systems are expanding rapidly, often with little public debate or oversight. The Atlas of Surveillance, maintained by the Electronic Frontier Foundation, has documented over 3,000 law enforcement and government agencies using Flock products as of 2025 - a number growing monthly.

Why Privacy Matters

"If you've got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear" is a tempting thought - until someone misuses your information. Privacy isn't about hiding wrongdoing. It's about autonomy, dignity, and the ability to live free from unjust scrutiny. "Saying you don't care about privacy because you have nothing to hide is like saying you don't care about free speech because you have nothing to say." - Edward Snowden

The Fourth Amendment was written in response to the British Crown's "general warrants" - broad authorizations to search anyone, anywhere, anytime. Mass surveillance revives that threat in digital form. Simply moving freely in public should not require that you be profiled and scrutinized.
It is important to point out that the courts have repeatedly ruled so-called "dragnet warrants," often using cell phone GPS locations, unconstitutional under the 4th amendment. Flock Security makes an end-run around these rulings by operating as a private entity, recording happenings in public, and then making their data available on the market. Of course governmental agencies can purchase goods and services from private entities, but private entities do not have the same restrictions around mass collection of private citizens' data.

Civil Liberties at Risk

We are fast approaching a world in which going about one's business in public means being entered into a law enforcement database. Automated license plate readers collect location data on millions of people with no suspicion of wrongdoing, creating vast databases of where we go and when.
Flock cameras and similar surveillance tools raise serious Fourth Amendment concerns by enabling broad, warrantless tracking of people's movements. In 2024, a trial court held that the Flock network functioned as a "dragnet over the entire city." The judge in the case equated it to placing GPS trackers on every vehicle - a practice that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled requires a warrant (Virginia Mercury, The Virginian Pilot).

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) warns that automatic license plate readers (ALPRs) are becoming tools for routine mass location tracking and surveillance, with too few rules governing their use. These systems can collect and store data on millions of innocent drivers, creating detailed records of people's movements without their knowledge or consent. (ACLU)

Legal scholars have highlighted the broader implications of such surveillance. Neil Richards, writing in the Harvard Law Review, emphasizes that surveillance can chill the exercise of civil liberties, particularly intellectual privacy, and increase the risk of blackmail, coercion, and discrimination. (Harvard Law Review)

Flock's data further enables already biased enforcement. In Oak Park, Illinois, 84% of drivers stopped using Flock camera alerts were Black - despite the town being only 21% Black. (Freedom to Thrive).

Corporate Incentives and Mass Surveillance

Flock encourages law enforcement agencies to promote adoption by recruiting private businesses and HOAs to install cameras and share footage. This practice enables police access to private footage showing not just cars, but people, clothing, behavior, and more.
(Flock Community Outreach).
Past surveillance programs have revealed how law enforcement discretion can be weaponized against perceived dissenters or "uncooperative" residents — such as in Pasco County, Florida, where residents were harassed and ticketed under the guise of "predictive policing." It's not hard to imagine similar risks arising when individuals or businesses decline to integrate with systems like Flock.

Flock also markets to employers and retail settings, blurring the lines between public safety and profit-driven surveillance (Flock Business Sales).

Corporate Incentives and Mass Surveillance

Flock encourages law enforcement agencies to promote adoption by recruiting private businesses and HOAs to install cameras and share footage. This practice enables police access to private footage showing not just license plates, but also detailed vehicle characteristics like make, model, color, and other distinguishing features (Flock Safety FAQ).
Retaliation and selective enforcement by law enforcement and government agencies—whether formal or informal—are documented concerns. For instance, the ACLU sued the Trump administration, alleging that Michael Cohen was imprisoned in retaliation for planning to publish a book critical of President Trump (ACLU News). It's not hard to imagine a business declining to integrate with Flock systems at the request of local police, and later being treated less favorably as a result.

Flock also markets to employers and retail settings, blurring the lines between public safety and profit-driven surveillance (Flock Business Sales).

The Illusion of Security

Flock advertises a drop in crime, but the true cost is a culture of mistrust and preemptive suspicion. As the EFF warns, communities are being sold a false promise of safety - at the expense of civil rights^* (EFF).

A 2019 report by the NAACP Legal Defense Fund warned that predictive policing tools premised on biased data will reflect that bias, reinforcing existing discrimination in the criminal justice system. These tools may appear objective, but instead often amplify historic injustice under a veneer of scientific credibility (NAACP LDF).

True safety comes from healthy, empowered communities; not automated suspicion. Community-led safety initiatives have demonstrated significant results: North Lawndale saw a 58% decrease in gun violence after READI Chicago began implementing their program there. In cities nationwide, the presence of local nonprofits has been statistically linked to reductions in homicide, violent crime, and property crime (Brennan Center, The DePaulia, American Sociological Association).

Part of a Larger Trend

Flock's expansion is part of a broader movement toward ubiquitous mass surveillance - where your associations, online comments, purchases, movements, and more may be logged, indexed, analyzed by AI, and made easily searchable by almost any government agency at any time.

Bruce Schneier, a prominent cryptographer and privacy advocate, put it simply: "Surveillance is the business model of the Internet." What begins as data collection for convenience or security often evolves into persistent monitoring, normalization of tracking, and the loss of autonomy.

As Edward Snowden warned: "A child born today will grow up with no conception of privacy at all. They'll never know what it means to have a private moment to themselves - an unrecorded, unanalyzed thought."

In Dunwoody, Georgia, drones are now dispatched from Flock Safety "nests" to respond to 911 calls autonomously, often arriving in under 90 seconds (Axios).

In California, 480 high-tech cameras were recently installed to surveil Oakland's highways - tracking license plates, bumper stickers, and vehicle types - with alerts sent to law enforcement in real-time (AP News).

Words from the Watchers

Some of the most chilling validations of mass surveillance come not from critics - but from the very people promoting it. These aren't out-of-context slips; they are open endorsements of a world where privacy is sidelined in favor of control, compliance, and convenient enforcement.

"Anything technology they think, ‘Oh it's a boogeyman. It's Big Brother watching you,' … No, Big Brother is protecting you."
- Eric Adams, NYC Mayor (Politico, 2022)
New York's mayor casually rebrands Orwell's authoritarian icon as a guardian figure. It's a startling reversal - not a warning about overreach, but a defense of it.

"Instead of being reactive, we are going to be proactive... [we] use data to predict where future crimes are likely to take place and who is likely to commit them... then deputies would find those people and take them out."
- Chris Nocco, Pasco County Sheriff (Tampa Bay Times, 2020)
This "Minority Report"-style program led to harassment of innocent people - and was ultimately found unconstitutional in court (Institute for Justice). A rare win, but a stark example of where unchecked surveillance can go.

"Tech firms should not develop their systems and services, including end-to-end encryption, in ways that empower criminals or put vulnerable people at risk."
- Priti Patel, UK Home Secretary UK Govt, 2019, (Infosecurity Magazine)
The logic: protecting everyone's privacy is dangerous. This kind of framing justifies backdoors into secure systems - which inevitably get abused.

"The risk [of built-in weaknesses]... is acceptable because we are talking about consumer products... and not nuclear launch codes."
- William Barr, U.S. Attorney General (TechCrunch, 2019)
A clear "rules for thee but not for me" mentality. Your data, messages, and devices don't deserve the same protections as the government's - because you're just a civilian.

China exploited a covert surveillance interface - originally built for lawful access by U.S. law enforcement - to tap into Americans' private phone records, messages, and geolocation data. (CISA)
Telecom providers are required by law to build these backdoors for law enforcement. The "Salt Typhoon" incident shows the risk: once a backdoor exists, it can be discovered and abused - and not just by "the good guys." (EFF, Reason)

Take Action

We don't have to accept this future. You can:

Contact your local officials and demand transparency and oversight of surveillance programs. (See 5 Calls)
Support organizations like the ACLU and the EFF who challenge mass surveillance in the courts and legislatures.
Start conversations with neighbors and community groups about the risks of systems like Flock.
Share this website and make your community aware.

^* Some quotes paraphrased for clarity. See linked sources for full context.