Why People Keep Attacking And Destroying These Special Traffic Cameras

Have you seen a Flock camera on your daily commute yet? If not, someone may have dropped things. More than 80,000 of these surveillance cameras have been installed across the US so far, making them one of the most widespread surveillance systems in the country. Undoubtedly, not everyone is happy with this unpleasant fact. It results in many Flock cameras being vandalized, dismantled, or completely destroyed.

Incidents of camera vandalism have been reported in several states so far, including Connecticut, Illinois, Virginia, California, and Oregon. The damage ranged from smashed machines to being cut off from poles or reportedly being shot at. When more cameras are installed, we may see a big push back – especially considering Flock’s role in immigration enforcement.

Apparently, Flock Safety is contracted to install these cameras to act as automatic license plate readers for local law enforcement. The cameras capture license plates on public roads and allow law enforcement authorities to search the images to suppress vehicles with potential ties to criminal investigations. Similar to the debate over red light cameras, critics say this is unconstitutional. And as an argument against doorbell cameras, there’s also the fact that Flock can (and does!) use its massive network to track people’s driving habits, including tracking where and when they go. Just look at one Virginia driver who was tracked over 500 times.

Given Flock’s contracts with law enforcement companies, there are legitimate concerns and fears about how that information is shared between agencies. Still, Flock insists its program is far from popular. The company says its cameras only capture images of public license plates and cannot track people or vehicles, especially not continuously over time. The company also says that many of the images collected are not accessible to investigators and are eventually deleted after a set retention period. Herd is further protected by having safeguards in place (such as audit logs, geofencing, and role-based access controls) to limit abuse of the system, as well.

But Flock’s actions tell a different story, especially their support around the anti-immigration efforts of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The agency relied on Flock to help locate people during raids and eviction efforts by way of local law enforcement agencies with access to data. It’s something Flock knows about and has fully acknowledged. That cooperation (however remote) has added fuel to the fire at town meetings, during public protests, and, in some cases, through direct action by residents who believe there is sufficient evidence that Flock is breaking the law and threatening civil liberties.