Criticizing Flock Cameras Got the Feds Involved

Our Take

FIRE's reporting lays out a troubling pattern: a resident speaks out against Flock Safety's license plate readers, uses some choice words with local police, and suddenly finds a police chief allegedly invoking federal agents in response. Whatever you think of the man's tone, the First Amendment doesn't come with a politeness clause. Telling off your local government is exactly the kind of speech it's meant to protect — and using the threat of federal muscle to punish a critic is the stuff of authoritarian playbooks, not community policing.

This matters because it's not really about one angry resident. It's about what happens when a surveillance system with zero federal oversight gets defended with the kind of intimidation usually reserved for actual threats, not criticism. Flock's network already operates with minimal transparency and almost no meaningful local pushback mechanisms in most towns. When the response to criticism is a threat instead of a public records request or an open meeting, that tells you everything about how seriously these departments take accountability.

If your town has Flock cameras and local officials seem more interested in protecting the technology than answering questions about it, you're not alone — and you're not powerless. Check our camera map to see what's already watching your streets, and head to our take-action page before you end up making headlines just for speaking your mind.