• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock, a network of AI cameras used by ICE, feds, and police

DukenukemX said:
Here's another example where the cops depend on Flock and screw up, except in this case it's being repeated. AI flagged him for a warrant for arrest, but he doesn't have a warrant so he keeps getting pulled over. He can't seem to get off the list. As a reminder, it's illegal for police to pull you over without legal justification because it breaks your Fourth Amendment rights. It seems having rights in 2026 USA doesn't seem to matter anymore.
View attachment 799418
Click to expand...

The issue isn't Flock telling them that there's a warrant. The issue is the county sheriff who incorrectly entered the information and has not changed it.

Second of all, the inflammatory images of police breaking into a car, using a PIT maneuver to disable another one, and ripping someone out of the driver's seat are not tied to the actual story. Nor does the individual state that it is. He simply states he's been "pulled over" on the basis of the warrant. It's the video equivalent of click bait. It's not even the same truck you see the individual using later. Typical anti-police BS.

Finally, it is legal to pull the vehicle over as a warrant hit would generally be considered reasonable suspicion which is completely legitimate under the 4th amendment. It has been litigated in actual court and not between armchair lawyers on the internet. I would say it would be illegal for them to take him into physical custody on the basis of a warrant they then would know to not be valid, but the stop itself is legitimate.
 
kirbyrj said:
The issue isn't Flock telling them that there's a warrant. The issue is the county sheriff who incorrectly entered the information and has not changed it.
Click to expand...
But they still depend on flock to determine if someone should get pulled over.
Second of all, the inflammatory images of police breaking into a car, using a PIT maneuver to disable another one, and ripping someone out of the driver's seat are not tied to the actual story. Nor does the individual state that it is. He simply states he's been "pulled over" on the basis of the warrant. It's the video equivalent of click bait. It's not even the same truck you see the individual using later. Typical anti-police BS.
Click to expand...
Overlooking that those scenes are real and could happen to someone who happens to be on Flocks shit list. Those scenes didn't happen to that man, but how long before Flock can turn a mistake into a deadly incident? Flock now says the man is armed and dangerous, so be ready with your side arms and pit maneuvers.
Finally, it is legal to pull the vehicle over as a warrant hit would generally be considered reasonable suspicion which is completely legitimate under the 4th amendment. It has been litigated in actual court and not between armchair lawyers on the internet. I would say it would be illegal for them to take him into physical custody on the basis of a warrant they then would know to not be valid, but the stop itself is legitimate.
Click to expand...
Yes but your suspicion is a camera system that's powered by AI, that depends on a cop who knows the difference between zero Ø and the letter O. I can see someone suing police departments for breaking 4th amendment rights because of Flock.

View: https://youtu.be/0xtiTVzcUX4?si=ZAOAUO2OASzIdrLP
 
DukenukemX said:
But they still depend on flock to determine if someone should get pulled over.

Overlooking that those scenes are real and could happen to someone who happens to be on Flocks shit list. Those scenes didn't happen to that man, but how long before Flock can turn a mistake into a deadly incident? Flock now says the man is armed and dangerous, so be ready with your side arms and pit maneuvers.

Yes but your suspicion is a camera system that's powered by AI, that depends on a cop who knows the difference between zero Ø and the letter O. I can see someone suing police departments for breaking 4th amendment rights because of Flock.

View: https://youtu.be/0xtiTVzcUX4?si=ZAOAUO2OASzIdrLP
Click to expand...


It's no different than any other license plate reader. In fact, I would guess based on my experience that flock isn't actually involved and it's a regular LP reader if the cops "come out of nowhere" and pull him over. Cops aren't sitting around waiting for some random flock camera to give them info, but LP readers in the cars give instant feedback for warrants and stolen vehicles, etc.

Those scenes are shown without context. You are making the claim that somehow they are tied to a "Flock shit list" but you have no idea where they actually came from or the context involving those vehicles. And you absolutely can't tie them to any flock camera based solely on the video. You're fear mongering based on your belief that cops are bad. There are literally millions of citizen/police interactions every year and the percentage of people who get killed by the police is a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the total interactions. Not to mention the people who are doing stupid things like fleeing from police or pulling weapons during an interaction.

No, your suspicion is based on the sheriff's entering the warrant. The issue is the sheriff incorrectly entering the warrant. The fact that the plate gets hit on whether through flock cameras or any LP reader is irrelevant. I'm sure you can see 4th amendment right violations because you hate the cops. At the end of the day, it isn't a 4th amendment violation. But if you're looking for someone to sue, sue the sheriff for incorrectly entering the plate.
 
kirbyrj said:
It's no different than any other license plate reader. In fact, I would guess based on my experience that flock isn't actually involved and it's a regular LP reader if the cops "come out of nowhere" and pull him over. Cops aren't sitting around waiting for some random flock camera to give them info, but LP readers in the cars give instant feedback for warrants and stolen vehicles, etc.

Those scenes are shown without context. You are making the claim that somehow they are tied to a "Flock shit list" but you have no idea where they actually came from or the context involving those vehicles. And you absolutely can't tied them to any flock camera based solely on the video.

No, your suspicion is based on the sheriff's entering the warrant. The issue is the sheriff incorrectly entering the warrant. The fact that the plate gets hit on whether through flock cameras or any LP reader is irrelevant. I'm sure you can see 4th amendment right violations because you hate the cops. At the end of the day, it isn't a 4th amendment violation. But if you're looking for someone to sue, sue the sheriff for incorrectly entering the plate.
Click to expand...
I can not speak for Texas but in Florida an LPR hit alone is not PC for a traffic stop or anything else. The burden is on the officer to confirm through FCIC/NCIC. If NCIC is wrong because of some administrative screw up (happens) then that's the issue, Flock is only reporting what it is told by the actual authoritative databases.
 
bigddybn said:
I can not speak for Texas but in Florida an LPR hit alone is not PC for a traffic stop or anything else. The burden is on the officer to confirm through FCIC/NCIC. If NCIC is wrong because of some administrative screw up (happens) then that's the issue, Flock is only reporting what it is told by the actual authoritative databases.
Click to expand...

If the sheriff entered the warrant, it's going to be in NCIC under that plate which the LPR hits on. The real issue is the sheriff's office needs to fix the problem.

At the same time, Axon LPRs only get updates once a day while the actual NCIC database should be realtime, so I have (somewhat rarely) encountered delay issues in that sense. So yes, the NCIC "hit" should take place before a traffic stop, but the NCIC data is likely wrong based on the sheriff's action/inaction, so even if they run it prior to initiating a traffic stop (which should happen), NCIC is likely going to show a warrant because at most the info is 24 hours or less out of date. The fact that the guy in the video has been pulled over some 11 times or whatever it was isn't a database issue, it's a NCIC issue with the sheriff.
 
Last edited:
kirbyrj said:
If the sheriff entered the warrant, it's going to be in NCIC under that plate which the LPR hits on. The real issue is the sheriff's office needs to fix the problem.

At the same time, Axon LPRs only get updates once a day while the actual NCIC database should be realtime, so I have (somewhat rarely) encountered delay issues in that sense. So yes, the NCIC "hit" should take place before a traffic stop, but the NCIC data is likely wrong based on the sheriff's action/inaction, so even if they run it prior to initiating a traffic stop (which should happen), NCIC is likely going to show a warrant because at most the info is 24 hours or less out of date. The fact that the guy in the video has been pulled over some 11 times or whatever it was isn't a database issue, it's a NCIC issue with the sheriff.
Click to expand...
Agreed. None of which is Flock's doing.
 
kirbyrj said:
It's no different than any other license plate reader. In fact, I would guess based on my experience that flock isn't actually involved and it's a regular LP reader if the cops "come out of nowhere" and pull him over. Cops aren't sitting around waiting for some random flock camera to give them info, but LP readers in the cars give instant feedback for warrants and stolen vehicles, etc.

Those scenes are shown without context. You are making the claim that somehow they are tied to a "Flock shit list" but you have no idea where they actually came from or the context involving those vehicles. And you absolutely can't tie them to any flock camera based solely on the video. You're fear mongering based on your belief that cops are bad. There are literally millions of citizen/police interactions every year and the percentage of people who get killed by the police is a fraction of a fraction of a percent of the total interactions. Not to mention the people who are doing stupid things like fleeing from police or pulling weapons during an interaction.

No, your suspicion is based on the sheriff's entering the warrant. The issue is the sheriff incorrectly entering the warrant. The fact that the plate gets hit on whether through flock cameras or any LP reader is irrelevant. I'm sure you can see 4th amendment right violations because you hate the cops. At the end of the day, it isn't a 4th amendment violation. But if you're looking for someone to sue, sue the sheriff for incorrectly entering the plate.
Click to expand...

Oh, it is far worse. It is actually a mismarked warrant thru the CO courts and the CSP, state police seem reluctant to do anything about it till the courts do something. Local news coverage explaining things more:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHwxV0Sd9V8

This is a classic example of the government screwing up and taking its sweet time to fix things because well, Gods er governments don't make mistakes and if they did it takes time to fix them. It looks like the local cops know and won't do anything, same with the county maybe but good luck if this guy leaves his town or county. Some rando cop not in the know, especially if there aren't any notes in the file will go gung ho and this driver will have to be a good little slave to the state and its minion's safety or get blasted for failure to obey etc. etc..
 
Ranulfo said:
Oh, it is far worse. It is actually a mismarked warrant thru the CO courts and the CSP, state police seem reluctant to do anything about it till the courts do something. Local news coverage explaining things more:


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nHwxV0Sd9V8

This is a classic example of the government screwing up and taking its sweet time to fix things because well, Gods er governments don't make mistakes and if they did it takes time to fix them. It looks like the local cops know and won't do anything, same with the county maybe but good luck if this guy leaves his town or county. Some rando cop not in the know, especially if there aren't any notes in the file will go gung ho and this driver will have to be a good little slave to the state and its minion's safety or get blasted for failure to obey etc. etc..
Click to expand...


Its the same thing with the "No Fly" list. If you accidentally get put on that then good luck getting off it. Your country may remove you if you jump through hoops but there's no guarantee that another country will and they share those lists quickly, but only to add new people not to remove mistakes. And because it is all based on national security considerations they don't have to tell you how you got on the list. The funny bit is that it is often difficult to know you're on the list until you show up at an airport with a ticket and then get refused.
 
Ididar said:
Its the same thing with the "No Fly" list. If you accidentally get put on that then good luck getting off it. Your country may remove you if you jump through hoops but there's no guarantee that another country will and they share those lists quickly, but only to add new people not to remove mistakes. And because it is all based on national security considerations they don't have to tell you how you got on the list. The funny bit is that it is often difficult to know you're on the list until you show up at an airport with a ticket and then get refused.
Click to expand...
Possibly interestingly enough, when you book a flight these days, in the US, as I just did today, there was a place to add some kind of DHS case number to help differentiate you from someone else with the same name on the no-fly or watch lists. Presumably you'd get that after getting turned away on a prior flight, but at least there's some level of effort.
 
1_rick said:
Possibly interestingly enough, when you book a flight these days, in the US, as I just did today, there was a place to add some kind of DHS case number to help differentiate you from someone else with the same name on the no-fly or watch lists. Presumably you'd get that after getting turned away on a prior flight, but at least there's some level of effort.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Canada has a process as well but the real problem is getting yourself removed from another nation's list. For non-citizens it can be near impossible to pull it off because they really lack the status to do much. I'm sure if you had enough money you could hire a team of lawyers to incessantly slam the DHS office over and over until they relented. But for the average joe it is pretty much impossible.
 
mullet said:
They see us no different then cattle.
Click to expand...
They see us as obstacles against their goals.
Ranulfo said:
Colorado again and the whole AI can't read zeros or O correctly.
Click to expand...
Police when Flocks AI makes a mistake.
anime girl oops.gif
 
Ranulfo said:
Colorado again and the whole AI can't read zeros or O correctly.
Click to expand...
Pretty sure license plate readers before "AI" existed had issues with 0s and Os. In California, other than vanity plates, we have a standard 1 number, 3 letters, 3 numbers so there should be no confusion.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Pretty sure license plate readers before "AI" existed had issues with 0s and Os. In California, other than vanity plates, we have a standard 1 number, 3 letters, 3 numbers so there should be no confusion.
Click to expand...
Tossed the existing OCR data and system in favor of the "shiny new thing", probably.
DukenukemX said:
Phoenix police admit using Mexican license plates was ‘unacceptable’ Specifically, unmarked cars. Besides likely to get shot when pulling over someone with Mexican plates, it also seems the Police don't like being tracked by Flock.
Click to expand...
If they're going to spy on people and it's all "public", probably paid for by taxes, then the camera feeds should be 100% accessible to anyone. Wonder how fast politicians and other minions of the law would change their tune if that were the case.
 
Prince Valiant said:
they're going to spy on people and it's all "public", probably paid for by taxes, then the camera feeds should be 100% accessible to anyone. Wonder how fast politicians and other minions of the law would change their tune if that were the case.
Click to expand...

Might have a leg to stand on if the government owned any of this equipment or infrastructure. But they don't. It's intentional that they don't. It allows a skirting of the Constitution and of any regulations.
Same reason the CIA and FBI use contractors for analysts-- they do not have whistleblower protections. Those only apply to direct federal employees.
 
Last edited:
sharknice said:
Look into the reason they stopped doing more To Catch a Predator episodes.
Click to expand...
They were skirting a fine line with entrapment. But more to the point someone commits suicide as a result if it and while everyone watching goes "good" it does leave a black eye on the point if the show.
 
sfsuphysics said:
They were skirting a fine line with entrapment. But more to the point someone commits suicide as a result if it and while everyone watching goes "good" it does leave a black eye on the point if the show.
Click to expand...
Not entrapment at all. Wasn’t the government/law enforcement making that show. As far as a black eye? Nah, give those guys a medal.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Then you shouldnt have any problem with Flock cameras since its not the government/law enforcing doing the recording
Click to expand...
The government rarely does things on it's own. They always employee someone. Who's doing the dirty work shouldn't make a difference.
 
sfsuphysics said:
Then you shouldnt have any problem with Flock cameras since its not the government/law enforcing doing the recording
Click to expand...
There's a massive difference between a chomo showing up getting caught trying to bang a kid vs everyone of us being treated like we are showing up at that house to bang kids when all we are doing is going about our lives.

Also I have a feeling the FBI should probably search your computer if you didn't like that show and feel like it was wrong and one of them killed themselves or whatever.
 
tunatime said:
There's a massive difference between a chomo showing up getting caught trying to bang a kid vs everyone of us being treated like we are showing up at that house to bang kids when all we are doing is going about our lives.
Click to expand...
Of course there's a massive difference, it's two separate potential crimes. The problem is the US Constitution still gives rights to all potential criminals.

tunatime said:
Also I have a feeling the FBI should probably search your computer if you didn't like that show and feel like it was wrong and one of them killed themselves or whatever.
Click to expand...
Of course you would have those feel that way, it's vary obvious that you believe rights shouldn't exist for anyone when you have strong feelings about something. But psssst... they still do.

But hey I get it... think of the children, that's all that really matters.
 
 

“Small Town Fights Over Flock's AI-Enhanced Network of License Plate-Reading Cameras​

EditorDavid 15 hours ago		42
160 miles north of New York City, a man was convicted of manslaughter "with the help of license plate reader technology," reports a local news station. In the small town of Troy (population: 51,000), the mayor described the cameras as "a critical tool" in that investigation. But locals and city officials "have raised concerns about who can access the data collected locally, along with data security, privacy invasions and use by federal authorities, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, reports WNYT:When Troy's contract came up for renewal, Mayor Carmella Mantello wanted to keep paying Flock and the council paused payments. The mayor then issued a public safety emergency declaration to keep the license plate readers active. The council has filed a lawsuit to overturn that..."If this illegal emergency order is left unchallenged, we give this mayor and any future mayor regardless of their political party or ideology, unchecked authority to issue an emergency declaration whenever they disagree with the council on any issue," [said Troy council president Sue Steele].
"The technology that's in place today is not the technology of six years ago," council president Steele told another local news station. "We have AI, we have rapidly changing and advancing technology. So that begs the need for regulations to protect certain data." The American Civil Liberties Union warns that Flock will use AI to let law enforcement search its trove of videos. But "Listen, if it was infringing on people's rights, people's liberties, we'd be the first to get rid of it. We have safeguards in place," [mayor] Mantello responded. Mantello noted that data captured by Troy's Flock cameras is only being shared with other local municipalities.

Steele said the data had been shared nationally until she and other elected officials raised concerns. "As far as sharing with local law enforcement, that's necessary in the normal course of investigations. The concern is what Flock does with this data: sharing it with ICE, for instance, and other nefarious outlets," Steele said.
As the debate continues over the small city's 26 Flock cameras, a columnist in Albany wrote that "it's a good thing. We should be asking questions about the growing surveillance state. We should be debating whether this is the future we want." As the American Civil Liberties Union noted, [Flock] has quietly built a broad mass-surveillance infrastructure, with cameras installed in 5,000 communities around the country, and is continually expanding how that network is used. Did we ask for that? Did we vote for it? Not really. The cameras have been installed in municipality after municipality, mostly with little discussion or controversy, which makes us like the proverbial frogs who didn't notice the water getting warmer until it was boiling. Suddenly, surveillance cameras are everywhere; we're always being watched...

[T]he City Council's Democratic majority is considering legislation that, among other steps, would require that data collected by the cameras be generally deleted after 48 hours and that the city be more transparent about how the cameras are used.
The controversy and pushback continues to draw local coverage. The mayor complains the proposed rules restricts the cameras "almost exclusively to cases involving individuals with outstanding felony arrest warrants or situations where officers can determine in advance that an incident will result in a felony charge... This is beyond reckless."

But the Albany columnist still argues many of America's Flock cameras are unnecessary and are "being installed just because... It's worth considering where this might lead and whether the future we're installing is the future we want."”
 
erek said:

“Small Town Fights Over Flock's AI-Enhanced Network of License Plate-Reading Cameras​

EditorDavid 15 hours ago		42
160 miles north of New York City, a man was convicted of manslaughter "with the help of license plate reader technology," reports a local news station. In the small town of Troy (population: 51,000), the mayor described the cameras as "a critical tool" in that investigation. But locals and city officials "have raised concerns about who can access the data collected locally, along with data security, privacy invasions and use by federal authorities, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, reports WNYT:When Troy's contract came up for renewal, Mayor Carmella Mantello wanted to keep paying Flock and the council paused payments. The mayor then issued a public safety emergency declaration to keep the license plate readers active. The council has filed a lawsuit to overturn that..."If this illegal emergency order is left unchallenged, we give this mayor and any future mayor regardless of their political party or ideology, unchecked authority to issue an emergency declaration whenever they disagree with the council on any issue," [said Troy council president Sue Steele].
"The technology that's in place today is not the technology of six years ago," council president Steele told another local news station. "We have AI, we have rapidly changing and advancing technology. So that begs the need for regulations to protect certain data." The American Civil Liberties Union warns that Flock will use AI to let law enforcement search its trove of videos. But "Listen, if it was infringing on people's rights, people's liberties, we'd be the first to get rid of it. We have safeguards in place," [mayor] Mantello responded. Mantello noted that data captured by Troy's Flock cameras is only being shared with other local municipalities.

Steele said the data had been shared nationally until she and other elected officials raised concerns. "As far as sharing with local law enforcement, that's necessary in the normal course of investigations. The concern is what Flock does with this data: sharing it with ICE, for instance, and other nefarious outlets," Steele said.
As the debate continues over the small city's 26 Flock cameras, a columnist in Albany wrote that "it's a good thing. We should be asking questions about the growing surveillance state. We should be debating whether this is the future we want." As the American Civil Liberties Union noted, [Flock] has quietly built a broad mass-surveillance infrastructure, with cameras installed in 5,000 communities around the country, and is continually expanding how that network is used. Did we ask for that? Did we vote for it? Not really. The cameras have been installed in municipality after municipality, mostly with little discussion or controversy, which makes us like the proverbial frogs who didn't notice the water getting warmer until it was boiling. Suddenly, surveillance cameras are everywhere; we're always being watched...

[T]he City Council's Democratic majority is considering legislation that, among other steps, would require that data collected by the cameras be generally deleted after 48 hours and that the city be more transparent about how the cameras are used.
The controversy and pushback continues to draw local coverage. The mayor complains the proposed rules restricts the cameras "almost exclusively to cases involving individuals with outstanding felony arrest warrants or situations where officers can determine in advance that an incident will result in a felony charge... This is beyond reckless."

But the Albany columnist still argues many of America's Flock cameras are unnecessary and are "being installed just because... It's worth considering where this might lead and whether the future we're installing is the future we want."”
Click to expand...
Holy hell, that's really scary. Way too much faith in AI technology.
"The technology that's in place today is not the technology of six years ago," council president Steele told another local news station. "We have AI, we have rapidly changing and advancing technology. So that begs the need for regulations to protect certain data." The American Civil Liberties Union warns that Flock will use AI to let law enforcement search its trove of videos.

Also, the Slashdot comment section is gold. Look at all the articles someone linked over Flock screw ups.
https://www.businessinsider.com/flock-safety-alpr-cameras-misreads-2026-3
https://www.yahoo.com/news/couple-handcuffed-morristown-due-license-220727432.html
https://coloradosun.com/2025/11/11/columbine-valley-police-officer-flock-disciplinary-action/
https://www.dailyjournal.com/articl...cense-plate-reader-surveillance-in-california
https://www.americanpartisan.org/20...nse-plates-whos-watching-and-should-we-worry/
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...ce-surveillance-tech-birds-iran-press-freedom
https://stateofsurveillance.org/news/flock-safety-cameras-exposed-no-password-2026/
 
  • Like
Reactions: erek
like this
erek said:

“Small Town Fights Over Flock's AI-Enhanced Network of License Plate-Reading Cameras​

EditorDavid 15 hours ago		42
160 miles north of New York City, a man was convicted of manslaughter "with the help of license plate reader technology," reports a local news station. In the small town of Troy (population: 51,000), the mayor described the cameras as "a critical tool" in that investigation. But locals and city officials "have raised concerns about who can access the data collected locally, along with data security, privacy invasions and use by federal authorities, including U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, reports WNYT:When Troy's contract came up for renewal, Mayor Carmella Mantello wanted to keep paying Flock and the council paused payments. The mayor then issued a public safety emergency declaration to keep the license plate readers active. The council has filed a lawsuit to overturn that..."If this illegal emergency order is left unchallenged, we give this mayor and any future mayor regardless of their political party or ideology, unchecked authority to issue an emergency declaration whenever they disagree with the council on any issue," [said Troy council president Sue Steele].
"The technology that's in place today is not the technology of six years ago," council president Steele told another local news station. "We have AI, we have rapidly changing and advancing technology. So that begs the need for regulations to protect certain data." The American Civil Liberties Union warns that Flock will use AI to let law enforcement search its trove of videos. But "Listen, if it was infringing on people's rights, people's liberties, we'd be the first to get rid of it. We have safeguards in place," [mayor] Mantello responded. Mantello noted that data captured by Troy's Flock cameras is only being shared with other local municipalities.

Steele said the data had been shared nationally until she and other elected officials raised concerns. "As far as sharing with local law enforcement, that's necessary in the normal course of investigations. The concern is what Flock does with this data: sharing it with ICE, for instance, and other nefarious outlets," Steele said.
As the debate continues over the small city's 26 Flock cameras, a columnist in Albany wrote that "it's a good thing. We should be asking questions about the growing surveillance state. We should be debating whether this is the future we want." As the American Civil Liberties Union noted, [Flock] has quietly built a broad mass-surveillance infrastructure, with cameras installed in 5,000 communities around the country, and is continually expanding how that network is used. Did we ask for that? Did we vote for it? Not really. The cameras have been installed in municipality after municipality, mostly with little discussion or controversy, which makes us like the proverbial frogs who didn't notice the water getting warmer until it was boiling. Suddenly, surveillance cameras are everywhere; we're always being watched...

[T]he City Council's Democratic majority is considering legislation that, among other steps, would require that data collected by the cameras be generally deleted after 48 hours and that the city be more transparent about how the cameras are used.
The controversy and pushback continues to draw local coverage. The mayor complains the proposed rules restricts the cameras "almost exclusively to cases involving individuals with outstanding felony arrest warrants or situations where officers can determine in advance that an incident will result in a felony charge... This is beyond reckless."

But the Albany columnist still argues many of America's Flock cameras are unnecessary and are "being installed just because... It's worth considering where this might lead and whether the future we're installing is the future we want."”
Click to expand...
More like the frog giving the scorpion a ride across the river.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top