Flock says it has 120,000 automated license plate reader (ALPR) and pan, tilt, rutor-24forum com and zoom (PTZ) cameras deployed throughout the US, capturing tens of billions of data points a month. Flock’s ALPRs automatically scan every license plate that passes them, while the PTZs record live footage that can be reviewed and analyzed. Because Flock cameras are all connected, the result is a nationwide latticework of recorded activity. Across the majority of states, a police officer in one state can be alerted if a car they’re looking for pops up in another and can inform the local authorities
In recent weeks and months, though, another kind of network has taken shape: a coast-to-coast pattern of opposition to the company. The objectors range from public officials to individual vigilantes, spanning metropolitan and rural America alike. In a politically divided country, opposition to Flock cameras is the rare issue that binds people across the ideological spectrum.
«It’s a violation of people’s privacy,» said Caleb Williams, a 24-year-old in rural South Carolina who identified as a political independent.
«Rational people know it comes down to violating personal liberties,» said Adrien Kaiser, a self-described constitutional conservative who lives northwest of Houston.
«I firmly believe the government can do things to make life better for people, but a surveillance state is the first step towards a police state,» said Jon Dendy, a progressive in Massachusetts.
Related article
Flock Safety camera at an intersection in Toledo, Ohio. The city of Toledo approved a three year $846,000 contract with Flock Group Inc. in November of 2025, $282,000 annually, but the ubiquity of Flock surveillance systems, roughly 80,000+ cameras, in the United States raises questions about privacy and data security.
Flock Safety camera at an intersection in Toledo, Ohio. The city of Toledo approved a three year $846,000 contract with Flock Group Inc. in November of 2025, $282,000 annually, but the ubiquity of Flock surveillance systems, roughly 80,000+ cameras, in the United States raises questions about privacy and data security.
/Stephen Zenner/SOPA Images/Sipa USA
Inside the growing police use and misuse of Flock’s license-plate reader cameras
8 min read
«Oftentimes our critics will say we need to make a choice between safety or privacy. And I think that’s I think that’s wrong,» Flock CEO Garrett Langley said in a recent interview with CNN’s Eric Levenson. «As a country, as a society, as a species, we have proven over and over and over again that we can have safety and privacy.»
Over the last few months, Flock has been making headlines for all the wrong reasons. Police have been caught using the system to stalk exes and colleagues, and journalists have reported that, contrary to the company’s claims that it only logs vehicles, the cameras can be used to track people.
still_22840032_2790829.463_still.jpg
Inside the growing police use and misuse of Flock cameras
3:20
These revelations have been met by a growing guerilla mindset among average citizens. Dozens of Flock cameras have been forcibly disabled in recent weeks, with many people cheering on the vigilantes. In June, a West Virginia man accused of destroying several Flock cameras was arrested. Under a Facebook post from the local NBC affiliate announcing his arrest are dozens of people volunteering to provide alibis. «He was out fishing with me that day, you got the wrong guy,» one man wrote.
«The one thing that’s bringing all of us together, which is exactly what they don’t want,» one woman wrote on Facebook. «The two biggest signs that we can indeed get along are 1) the world cup & 2) our collective middle finger to flock cameras,» added someone else.
In Houston, near where Kaiser lives, there are
