With the modernization of new technology and AI, different technology has surfaced. One of those specific technologies is known as “Flock” cameras. A Flock camera is a privately held American manufacturer and operator of surveillance technology primarily automated to store data on license plates, and details of cars that pass such cameras. If you’re driving on Highway 82 headed toward Carbondale from the north, you have passed one of these cameras, which subsequently registers time, date and direction along with licence plate, car make, color, roof racks and even bumper stickers. This data is held within the database for up to 30 days where it is eventually discarded. Within this time period private owners of the camera (usually law enforcement) are able to freely access the data on your whereabouts.
Within Garfield County, there are 31 documented Flock automated license plate reader (ALPR) locations. According to the February Post Independent article, “Glenwood Springs restricts outside access to police license plate reader data,” there are 21 cameras currently operated within the city of Glenwood Springs.
Flock cameras, for a lot of concerned citizens, have raised the argument against mass public surveillance. It reminds some, including myself, of literary works like George Orwell’s “1984,” or at least the start of it. The Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution has dictated laws, trials and courts system in the attempts to protect citizens from unlawful search and seizure. The use of Flock cameras in recent years have been a heavily debated issue within the U.S. courts, which begs the question, what is the expectation of privacy on public roads and what makes it different from an officer writing down a license plate. The answer is simply, a cop couldn’t track thousands of cars within an hour and retain the vast detail and information the cameras store.
Within the time that Flock cameras have been installed, over 50 law enforcement officials across the country have been accused or charged for misuse of the technology, most using cameras to stalk ex-partners. According to ABC15 Arizona’s “Kentucky officer accused of using police cameras to track ex over 2,000 times,” written in August. “Investigators found Zahir had conducted 2,048 Flock searches from January into May to track two vehicles registered to the victim, his child’s mother, in Kentucky and Indiana, court records show,” the article states.
Furthermore, individuals have hacked into the Flock database, allowing someone without authorization to get ahold of such vast information and highlighting how, if the technology falls into the wrong hands, catastrophic consequences can incur.
The public’s reaction to Flock has generally been received negatively. Many individuals across the country have taken upon themselves the duty of removing Flock, vandalizing and destroying cameras across the country, as reflected in the August NPR article, “Amid intense backlash, people are vandalizing Flock surveillance cameras.”
Vigilantism is a complicated debate of right and wrong, however these actions do prove something specific. If individuals are willing to risk the criminal charge of vandalising police property, it truly shows how some feel about the technology and its implications. Those advocating for their rights legally have taken every approach to keeping Flock cameras out of their counties, to the point where Darth Vader became involved. A viral social media clip recently surfaced of a San Diego City Council meeting, in which a particular individual dressed as Darth Vader spoke to council about how he favored the cameras as they would help progress his evil agenda and allow him to stalk Luke Skywalker across the galaxy.
As a teenager growing up with this technology, it bothers me. I feel as though technology, though invented for the right reasons, can too easily be corrupted. I don’t want to drive on highways that can track my every move and feel that if these companies can get away with this level of mass surveillance, it may only be the start. Within no time their capabilities may grow into monitoring our driving, conversations or even personal lives; this is a future which may be closer than imagined. The brightside, however, is that on a community level, we have the power to decide. Carbondale Town Manager Ryan Hyland said in a May board of trustees meeting that, “With respect to the Flock cameras, there’s no plans to bring any proposals for Flock cameras to the board from the police department at this time.” However you may feel about the new technology of Flock, you’re entitled to your opinion, whether it’s spreading the word, voting or community involvement. Just remember you have a choice.