Imagine a child is abducted. A hit-and-run driver speeds away. A carjacker disappears down the highway. Police have a license plate number – but no witnesses who know where the suspect went.
Now imagine a camera spots that vehicle 10 minutes later, alerts nearby officers in real time, and helps make an arrest. That’s what Flock Safety cameras are designed to do.
Yet opponents insist the cameras represent the end of freedom, arguing they’re nothing more than government surveillance. It’s a catchy talking point, but it leaves out a few important facts.
Flock cameras don’t identify who you are. They don’t use facial recognition. They don’t record conversations. They don’t track your cellphone or GPS. They simply photograph vehicles driving on public roads, capturing license plates along with basic identifying information such as the vehicle’s make, model, color, and distinguishing features.
If a vehicle connected to a stolen car, kidnapping, armed robbery or other crime passes a camera, police can receive an alert almost immediately. Investigators can also search historical sightings to help piece together where a suspect traveled before or after a crime.
In other words, they’re a very important investigative tool. According to Flock, 10,000 missing people were located in 2025 with their technology. What if one of those people was a loved one of yours?
What about this kid who was almost kidnapped recently from her mother’s car while doing an Instacart run???!
And let’s not pretend Flock cameras are the only things keeping an eye on us. Americans drive past countless cameras every day – traffic cameras, business security systems (Walmart, Walgreens, etc), ATM cameras, convenience stores, gas stations, Ring doorbells and dashcams. Your license plate is visible to every driver on the road. Flock simply gives law enforcement a faster way to locate vehicles tied to serious crimes.
The privacy concerns that people have deserve to be taken seriously. Any technology that collects data should come with strict rules governing who can access it, how it’s used, and how long the information is retained. There should be oversight, audits, and consequences for misuse. Those are reasonable safeguards. No technology is perfect and neither are human beings.
But outright rejecting a system that has repeatedly helped recover stolen vehicles, locate missing people, and identify violent criminals doesn’t make communities freer. It just makes criminals harder to catch. You can’t have freedom without security.