⚡ After Town Bans Flock, Councilmember Crashes Out, Proposes Internet and Phone Ban — Mind Blown! #s

Our Take

Credit to Anisha for capturing a moment that, if it played out the way the title suggests, is almost too on-the-nose: a town council votes to reject Flock Safety's automated license plate readers, and a councilmember's response is to essentially argue that if we're banning tracking tech, why stop at cameras — let's ban phones and the internet too. It's a rhetorical move we see constantly in these debates: frame privacy protections as absurd overreach rather than engage with the actual argument that warrantless, always-on surveillance of every car on every road is a different animal than carrying a phone you chose to buy.

The comparison falls apart under any scrutiny. Nobody is forced to carry a smartphone, and you can decline to use the internet. You cannot choose to not drive past an ALPR camera that logs your plate, location, and timestamp into a database that cops, federal agencies, and sometimes private companies can query. That data gets retained, shared, and in Flock's case, increasingly networked across jurisdictions in ways most residents never consented to and most councils never fully explain before voting yes.

What this clip really shows is how hard it is for elected officials to sit with a community saying 'no' to surveillance expansion, and how often that discomfort turns into deflection instead of honest debate about costs, accuracy, and mission creep. If your town is having this fight right now, check whether Flock or similar ALPR systems are already deployed near you on our map, and use our take-action guide to push your own council toward a real conversation instead of a false choice.