Wisconsin’s candidates for governor want to limit them, while Pennsylvania’s say they support a ban. A Michigan congressional candidate called them “un-American.” A Florida Senate candidate is selling merch opposing them.
Across the country and up and down ballots, candidates from both parties are increasingly on the attack over Flock cameras, the AI-powered nationwide network of automated cameras that record license plates and other characteristics of all passing vehicles, allowing law enforcement agencies to search and share that data. Although police say the cameras are an invaluable crime-fighting tool, some critics say their pervasiveness amounts to unconstitutional warrantless mass surveillance.
The cameras sold by Atlanta-based Flock Safety, which the company has said are running in 6,000 communities in every state but Alaska, have become a new campaign issue that candidates and strategists see as part of a backlash against powerful technology companies, connected to broader debates over the future of artificial intelligence and the associated boom in data center construction.
“We’ve seen candidates running on banning them, cutting off funding, or requiring warrants. That’s a credit to activists across the country who have raised concerns about their use,” Michael Soyfer, an attorney for the Institute for Justice, a public interest law firm litigating over the technology, said in a statement.
In response to questions about the cameras as a campaign theme, a Flock spokeswoman emphasized the company’s claims about the power of its technology, saying it helped “solve approximately one million crimes and helped reunite roughly 10,000 missing people with their families.”
“We ask anyone weighing in on this issue to engage with the facts and the record: the crimes solved, the families reunited, the safeguards already in place, and what our technology actually does,” said MoMo Zhou, the company’s vice president of communications. “We ask them to work with the communities using this technology to decide what rules should govern it and not to spread misinformation or ban a critical public safety tool outright that is helping to make communities safer.”
Flock opponents cite privacy concerns
License plate reader technology is decades old, and Flock was founded in 2017. But the company has faced a growing backlash this year — one that’s crescendoed in recent weeks. It has come as awareness has grown about the sweeping reach of Flock’s network, litigation has unfolded over constitutional questions related to the use of the cameras, and news media have documented cases of officers misusing the technology to stalk personal connections.
Watch out for politicians seeking reelection that changed their position on surveillance cameras in the last few months. Judge them by their previous actions, not their desperate lies to get re-elected.
Imagine, a person follows you around. Tracks everything you do- they know when you go to the hardware store. Know what you buy.
They know when you go to the grocery store. Know what you buy there.
Target and Walmart too.
They all know your car. They know what you stop to look at before moving on. They know what you don’t stop but grab quickly.
This person knows what you look like, can recognize you just by how you walk, and knows when you’re speeding, they know how you drive.
They know when you go to the doctors.
They know when you go to planned parenthood.
They know your credit score. How much debt you have. How much you make, what hours you work.
They know everything about you, including the last time you had sex because you put an Amazon dot in your bedroom and they paid Amazon for that knowledge.
Imagine all that.
Now start asking what kinda stalking charges that person is guilty of.
Now realize they’re doing this to 350 million people.
But it’s okay because cops happen to be some other clients.
(Weee fascism!)
