Started By
Message

re: Flock cameras lead to another innocent motorist pulled over at gunpoint

Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:10 pm to
Posted by chryso
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
13936 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:10 pm to
You have no privacy when you're out in public.
Posted by Boston911
Lafayette
Member since Dec 2013
2574 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:10 pm to
This isn’t a Flock failure, it’s a failure on behalf of the agency who didn’t remove the plate off the hot list. The cameras did what they were programmed to do
Posted by Recognizable Poster
Geaux Tigers
Member since Mar 2026
1161 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:11 pm to
Noticed these for the first time in my neighborhood. It doesn't help that they're matte black colored. Makes it look very dystopian
Posted by Willie Stroker
Member since Sep 2008
16996 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:11 pm to
The problem was not the camera.
The problem was with humans failing to update their data entry responsibility.

This sucks but it happened before Flock cameras.

It’s like the era of the 90s when people were blaming SUVs for car accidents.
Posted by Willie Stroker
Member since Sep 2008
16996 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:12 pm to
quote:

Time to sue the Flock company into oblivion

What’s next? Suing a restaurant because someone misused their hot coffee?

Suing Glock because someone used it to murder?

Suing a pencil company because someone was stabbed with it?
This post was edited on 8/7/26 at 12:14 pm
Posted by fightin tigers
Downtown Prairieville
Member since Mar 2008
79575 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:14 pm to
quote:

You have no privacy when you're out in public.


Privacy and farming your information for profit or tracking are entirely different.

Those who love government disagree though.
Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
21806 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:16 pm to
quote:

You have no privacy when you're out in public.


If that's the case the Supreme Court would have ruled differently in Jones and Chatrie. If there's no expectation of privacy in public at all, GPS trackers shouldn't be an issue, right? Or tracking movement via your cellphone without a warrant?
Posted by Snipe
Member since Nov 2015
17138 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:21 pm to
Is it just me or does anyone else think Flock Cameras are 2026s version of Murder Hornets.

Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
21806 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:25 pm to
quote:

The problem was not the camera.
The problem was with humans failing to update their data entry responsibility.


You're going to have a hard time convincing the average person mass surveillance functioning well means innocent drivers and families get guns pointed at them.
Posted by dallastigers
Member since Dec 2003
10926 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:31 pm to
quote:

But when Brookfield Police called Milwaukee Police Department, MPD said they no longer needed the car or the people inside, so officers let them go.


If they had to call the other police department directly is this a 100% a flock issue or flock flagging car because the police’s system still incorrectly had the reported car as an active issue?

Meaning whether it was Flock, some existing license plate scanner attached to a cop’s car, the cop entering in the tag into a terminal, or the cop calling it into to dispatch would the car have still been flagged in their system?

Seems like it was the police’s network caused the other department leaving it active, and it would have been flagged even if plates just run the old fashion way.
quote:

MPD said staff failed to remove a wanted vehicle alert from the system.

But when Brookfield Police called the Milwaukee Police Department, MPD said they no longer needed the car or the people inside, so officers let them go.

FOX6 News reached out to MPD to learn why that car was still active in the Flock system. The department said it was not a Flock issue, but a personnel issue – staff failed to remove a wanted vehicle alert from the system.



This post was edited on 8/7/26 at 1:14 pm
Posted by Red Eagle
Member since Aug 2026
101 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:42 pm to
quote:

What’s next? Suing a restaurant because someone misused their hot coffee?

Suing Glock because someone used it to murder?

Suing a pencil company because someone was stabbed with it?
Dumb
Posted by spacecitydude
HTX
Member since Nov 2021
324 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:42 pm to
quote:

They caught a couple stolen vehicles near my area that were just passing through and one of them was a violent guy with a stolen firearm.

There is good and bad here. I know they'll get abused/misused, but they have gotten some bad hombres off the streets too.


Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Ben Franklin

ETA: Someone beat me to it, but my post still bears repeating
This post was edited on 8/7/26 at 12:44 pm
Posted by NYNolaguy1
Member since May 2011
21806 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:42 pm to
quote:

Meaning whether it was Flock, some existing license plate scanner attached to a cop’s car, the cop entering in the tag into a terminal, or the cop calling it into to dispatch would the car have still been flagged in their system?


What's the utility of using a system that's far more invasive (flock cameras) than previous technology, but is functionally only as good as the previous system, but with far more downsides? I am struggling to see the justification for this system in a functional sense, and that's ignoring the legal and constitutional issues.
Posted by Jackie Chan
Japan?
Member since Sep 2012
4930 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:46 pm to
quote:

You have no privacy when you're out in public.


Expectation of privacy and the expectation to not be under constant surveillance are different
Posted by chryso
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
13936 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:48 pm to
How many of you are going to take down the cameras outside your house?
Posted by neverputstheseatdown
Member since Nov 2025
37 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:48 pm to
It’s the lack of control of access of a database, showing all my movements that gives me the problem. The data needs to be maintained by a third-party and only access through warrants or through some other emergency procedure.
Posted by chryso
Baton Rouge
Member since Jul 2008
13936 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:49 pm to
This is obviously true. This stuff is new. There are always kinks that need to be ironed out.
Posted by MoarKilometers
Member since Apr 2015
21380 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:53 pm to
quote:

What’s next? Suing a restaurant because someone misused their hot coffee?

Suing Glock because someone used it to murder?

Suing a pencil company because someone was stabbed with it?

If these companies exclusively dealt with the government and a government employee willingly misused their item in an incredibly predictable fashion, absolutely, 100%.
Posted by weadjust
Member since Aug 2012
15805 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:55 pm to
Do you hate your boss or ex spouse?

Steal a random car tag. Wait 30-60 days for the stolen tag # to get in the flock system. Put stolen tag on your targets car. That's going to be tough to explain when they get pulled over.
Posted by F1y0n7h3W4LL
Below I-10
Member since Jul 2019
4465 posts
Posted on 8/7/26 at 12:56 pm to
quote:

I'd rather have some crime with more freedom than vice versa, but that's just me. Fun fact, a lot of jurisdictions that have adopted them can't show a meaningful drop in crime, while still dramatically increasing surveillance on everyone, stored on questionable legal and cyber security grounds (it's stored in Amazon Web Services cloud).


....and...a little FA/FO justice sometimes gets played out.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram