Opposition to Flock cameras and which communities will end up keeping them

More people are stating or acting on their opposition to Flock cameras along roadways:

Photo by Giant Asparagus on Pexels.com

Over the last few months, people have cut down surveillance cameras owned by the company Flock Safety with an electric saw in upstate New York, thrown paint on them in Oakland, California, and rammed a truck into them in Idaho. One man in Florida sits in a lawn chair holding up a piece of cardboard on a pole to block the camera’s view. City governments have joined in by deactivating the cameras or canceling contracts with Flock in Fort Collins, Colorado; Eugene, Oregon; Madison, Wisconsin; Knoxville, Tennessee; Syracuse, New York; and Walla Walla, Washington…

Flock says it has 120,000 automated license plate reader (ALPR) and pan, tilt, 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…

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.

I wondered in October 2025 why there was so little opposition in suburbs to license plate cameras. In that post, I suggested one reason suburban residents may not oppose the cameras is because of fear of crime.

As more Americans now respond to the cameras, which communities will end up cancelling contracts and which ones will keep them? The list above in the first paragraph involves smaller big cities. Does this mean opposition to cameras is primarily in such communities? Or would opposition to cameras drop (1) in places with higher crime rates or (2) in places with higher fear of crime?

It will also be interesting to see how local leaders in different kinds of communities respond to public pressure. Who will resist opposition and what reasons will they give? The company offers a defense of their product and its use; whether local leaders use similar lines remains to be seen.

Why so little resistance to license plate cameras across suburbia? Two possible theories

In the last few years, license plate cameras have popped up across suburbs near where I live. It took me a while to recognize what they were, but now that I know what they look like, I see they are in many locations. Why has there been little resistance to the presence of these cameras? I find it hard to imagine suburbanites would have liked this happening several decades ago. Why so little discussion or opposition today?

Photo by Andreas Ebner on Pexels.com

Two conjectures (with no evidence for either outside of my own knowledge of suburbs):

  1. Fear of crime. They see and hear many stories about crime and the role of cars in those crimes. If license plate cameras can track people who commit crimes and do so quickly, that may be a small price to pay to keep their suburban community safe. (See also use of doorbell cameras in efforts to combat suburban crime.)
  2. The surveillance state is already here, whether there are license plate cameras or not. People can be tracked by their phones, their credit card activity, their social media use, through cameras mounted inside and outside buildings. Why fight a system that is already in place and to which we already assented (by using smartphones, social media, etc.)? (See the term “surveillance capitalism” first used in 2014.)

There could be other factors at play. Companies and organizations have pushed these cameras as opportunities and solutions? People haven’t noticed them or don’t know what they are? This is just part of technological and social change?

I will be looking to see if there is more public discussion of their presence and how much information is available about how often they are used.