Crashing out over not being able to spy on people is crazy work. #crashout #flock #surveillance
The short version: Jake Burleson's frustrated reaction video calls out politicians dismissing constituents who oppose Flock cameras, underscoring a national pattern of local officials ignoring surveillance pushback.
Our Take
Jake Burleson is clearly fed up, and honestly, that frustration tracks with what we hear constantly from readers. His video captures something we see play out in city council meetings across the country: residents show up, voice real concerns about ALPR networks, and watch officials wave it off like public input is a formality rather than the point of the meeting. Credit to Burleson for putting a raw, unfiltered voice on a dynamic that usually gets buried in bureaucratic language.
The "crashout" framing is funny, but the underlying issue isn't. When a council or police department has already decided they want Flock cameras, public comment periods can turn into theater — a box to check before rubber-stamping a surveillance expansion that was functionally approved behind closed doors. That's not a local quirk, it's a pattern. Vendors pitch these systems as neutral crime-fighting tools, but the rollout process itself often reveals how little weight community objection actually carries once money and political capital are already committed.
If you're frustrated watching this too, don't let it stop at frustration. Check our camera map to see what's already deployed near you, and hit up our take-action page for ways to actually make your voice count before the next vote, not after.
This is DeFlock The USA’s original commentary. The video above is the work of Jake Burleson, published on YouTube — full credit to the creator.