The surveillance state is growing at an alarming speed—and it deserves far more of our attention.
Instead, the issue is being shoved aside, and I believe that is intentional. Politicians and authorities on both sides of the aisle have allowed this expansion to continue largely unchecked.
A visual showing the spread of Flock cameras across the United States since 2024 should alarm every American. The growth is staggering.
Flock cameras are automated license plate readers that log information about every vehicle passing them—and that is merely what we know about their capabilities.
You would be hard-pressed to live anywhere in the United States today without having your movements stored on a data server somewhere. These cameras are where I live, and they are in the farming communities to the east and west of me.
I have heard all the arguments for why these cameras are supposedly a good thing. I am here to tell you that I do not believe they are worth the cost to our liberty.
Benjamin Franklin famously warned, “Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
The freedom to go about your daily life without the government tracking your movements is about as fundamental as liberty gets. Yet government agencies are among the biggest partners and customers of Flock Safety’s surveillance systems.
The technology has already produced countless stories of misuse, abuse and wrongful encounters between police and law-abiding citizens.
Consider what happened to a woman named Charlotte in Colorado. Police believed she had stolen a package from a porch. Their primary evidence was data from Flock cameras showing her vehicle in the general area.
Police had the wrong person.
Charlotte had evidence demonstrating that she was somewhere else when the crime occurred, including footage from her own dashboard camera and video from a friend’s doorbell camera. Investigators reportedly refused to consider it.
She should never have been forced to jump through those hoops. The department placed far too much confidence in a license plate reader and apparently very little in anything else. Even an airtight alibi seemed to be of no interest to the officers—and I use the word “investigators” very lightly.
Charlotte hit the nail on the head with her assessment of what happened.
At the end of the day, this was a mistake made by an arrogant department that failed to do its due diligence before accusing the wrong person.
It is also the kind of mistake that can happen anywhere—and increasingly is happening everywhere—because we are handing enormous power to companies and institutions run by imperfect people. Taxpayers are paying for the system, but the true cost extends far beyond the price of the cameras.
People like Charlotte can have their lives disrupted, their time wasted and their reputations threatened by faulty accusations. For an innocent person, the experience can be genuinely terrifying.
Another couple faced an even more dangerous ordeal. Police pulled them from their vehicle at gunpoint and placed them in handcuffs after a Flock camera made a mistake—all while the couple’s newborn son remained in the car.
Imagine how terrifying that must have been.
The couple did exactly the right thing by remaining calm and not reacting. But how many parents would be able to stay composed while armed officers separated them from their infant?
These cameras are placing civilians and police officers alike in dangerous situations that none of them asked for.
At that point in the encounter, officers had not even checked the vehicle’s registration. The couple had been pulled away from their child and handcuffed because a Flock camera identified the wrong car.
Notice how the officers worded their explanation: “Your car flagged our cameras.”
Not “the Flock cameras mistakenly flagged your car.”
Even the vehicle’s owner remained worried that she had somehow done something wrong, despite the fact that the mistake belonged entirely to the surveillance system and the department relying upon it.
She told the officers they had nearly given her a heart attack. Had either person reacted more emotionally, the encounter could have ended every bit as tragically as those words suggest.
Absolute power corrupts absolutely. It is a lesson as old as time.
The officers did not take nearly enough responsibility for what happened, but that problem will only grow as the government expects Americans to become more comfortable with constant surveillance.
Here is an idea: Businesses can face fines of several thousand dollars for repeated false fire alarms once their warnings have been exhausted. Why not apply the same principle here?
Charge law enforcement agencies or Flock Safety $25,000 per person for every detention resulting from a false alarm generated by a Flock system, with the money paid directly to the victims. Civilians cannot be the only ones forced to bear the cost of these mistakes.
It should come as no surprise that Americans across the country are rising up against these cameras, including in South Carolina.
The backlash is playing out from north to south and east to west—and members of the public appear to be having some fun supporting the people responsible.
Around 40,000 tips were reportedly submitted, including gems such as:
* “I drove by with my windows down, sneezed, it must’ve hit them!”
* “I heard he had a cape!”
* “I was told his name is Robinhood and I’ll be damned if Sherwood Forest starts snitchin’.”
I have to admit, I love that.
The same story is unfolding in Texas, where one local leader understands exactly why people are so frustrated.
One tip reportedly claimed that “the cameras have succumbed to heat exhaustion.”
Incredible.
In Arizona, another fed-up resident has no problem admitting just how frustrated he is—and he has no regrets.
He is exactly right: We cannot do nothing.
This issue is much bigger than any one person can tackle alone, but that does not mean we should stand idly by and complain. Public outrage is already producing results. About 100 municipalities have taken official action by canceling their contracts and deactivating the cameras, including some here in Michigan.
We can stand up against this.
If you have influence with your local government, use your voice—like this Sullivan County commissioner in Tennessee did, even if you choose language that is a little less colorful.
I am not calling for violence. I am calling for accountability—and for the entire surveillance system to be shut down.
The surveillance state does not care about you. It does not care about your family. It will do whatever it can to make a buck, including selling your information to the highest bidder.
I do not want that happening here—or anywhere else in my country.
Neither should you.