Jump to content

Flock Safety

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Flock Group Inc.
Company typePrivate
IndustryTechnology
Surveillance
Founded2017
FoundersGarrett Langley
Matt Feury
HeadquartersAtlanta, Georgia,
U.S.
Key people
Garrett Langley (CEO)
ProductsAutomated license plate readers
CCTV cameras
Gunfire detection systems
Software
Websiteflocksafety.com

Flock Group Inc., doing business as Flock Safety,[1] is an American manufacturer and operator of automated license plate recognition (ALPR), video surveillance, and gunfire locator systems. Founded in 2017, Flock operates such systems under contract with law enforcement agencies, neighborhood associations, and private businesses, and as of 2024, claims to operate in over 5,000 communities across at least 42 U.S. states.[2][3][4]

Flock markets its services as tools for crime prevention, and claims that they are effective at aiding criminal investigations; however, they are widely described by critics as an example of mass surveillance, and their efficacy and effects on privacy and other civil liberties are the subject of extensive public scrutiny, debate, and litigation.[5]

Corporate history

[edit]

Flock was founded in 2017.[6] It was co-founded by three Georgia Tech alumni: Garrett Langley (chief executive officer), Paige Todd (chief people officer), and Matt Feury (chief technology officer).[7][8] It began as a side project in which the three co-founders built their first video surveillance cameras by hand around Langley's dining room table.[7] When a DeKalb County detective told Langley that his camera product had helped with solving a home break-in, Langley called the two other co-founders and told them to quit their jobs.[7]

Flock has raised $380 million in venture funding, with a $3.5 billion valuation in 2022.[9]

By 2024, Flock's fixed cameras had been installed in over 4,000 cities across 42 states.[2][10][11] By April of that year, Flock employed over 900 people.[8] That October, Flock acquired Aerodome, a manufacturer of drones for law enforcement, and announced plans to introduce its own line of drones.[12]

Products

[edit]
Typical Flock ALPR, mounted to a pole and powered by a solar panel

Automatic license plate readers

[edit]

Flock's most popular products, the Falcon and Sparrow, are cameras which monitor traffic and photograph the rear of all passing vehicles. Their software uses artificial intelligence to read the vehicles' license plates and identify other distinguishing visual characteristics, sending that information to a central server via cellular network.[13] Flock's servers then log this identifying data, with the time and location of the scan, in a searchable database, and compare all results with the National Crime Information Center, as well as state and local police watchlists of cars that are reported stolen or otherwise of interest to the police, instantly alerting nearby officers upon a match.[14][15][16]

ALPRs like Flock's differ from traffic enforcement cameras in that they are used exclusively for surveillance and criminal investigations, and do not perform any enforcement of traffic laws.[17][18] Motorola Solutions is Flock's primary competitor in the ALPR market.[14][19]

Flock claims that its system's ability to identify vehicles' visual features, which it calls "vehicle fingerprint technology," is unique among ALPR systems; they state that the system can identify vehicles' make, model, and color, as well as other distinguishing attributes such as mismatching colors, bumper stickers, dents, and temporary license plates, allowing investigators to search for recorded vehicles based on these characteristics.[11][20][21]

Most Flock devices are powered by solar panels and rechargeable batteries, allowing them to operate in locations without access to mains electricity.[22] Many are mounted on manufacturer-supplied poles, while others are affixed to existing lampposts or telephone poles.[22][23]

Integration with other camera systems

[edit]

Flock offers software which integrates its ALPR and vehicle identification software into existing video camera systems, including Axon dashcams widely used in police vehicles.[24][25]

Gunshot detector

[edit]

Launched in 2021, the lesser-known Flock Raven is an audio gunfire locator, similar in function to ShotSpotter.[26] The Raven records audio in 5-second increments, using artificial intelligence to analyze the sound clips for audible gunfire; when a gunshot is detected, the device estimates its location and alerts police.[27] Like the ALPRs, they can be mounted on manufacturer-supplied poles and powered by solar panels.[28]

Business model

[edit]

Flock owns and operates all of its devices,[29] leasing them to law enforcement agencies,[30] homeowners' associations,[31] schools,[32] retailers,[33][34] and commercial and residential property managers.[34][35][36] Private customers are able to create customizable watchlists in the system,[31][37] and many share data from their systems with police agencies.[38]

Major clients

[edit]

Major private Flock customers include:

Efficacy

[edit]

Flock claims that their technology significantly reduces crime where deployed. In 2023, a Flock spokesperson claimed that the company's system aided in 7% of successful criminal investigations in the United States;[42] in 2024, the company claimed that its devices "help to solve 10% of reported crime."[43]

Flock's investors tout its surveillance power:[11]

"What magnifies the power of Flock Safety even more is that the digital evidence can be pooled across different law enforcement agencies for a short period of time, making it more powerful as adoption scales within a community and across the U.S. more broadly...The power of Flock Safety is in its network. The more devices deployed, the more evidence there is to solve crimes."

One example is the case of San Marino, California, where Flock Safety's technology was credited with an 80% reduction in residential burglaries in early 2021 compared to the same period in 2020. This statistic was used extensively in the company's marketing efforts. A closer examination revealed that overall, residential burglaries, and more serious offenses, in San Marino did not decrease in the years following Flock's introduction; burglaries slightly increased, and serious crimes remained nearly unchanged.[44]

Further investigation into Flock Safety's claims across other cities, such as Fort Worth, Dayton, and Lexington, showed a pattern of selective data use and potentially misleading marketing practices. Flock marketing overstated the effectiveness of its technology in reducing crime.[44]

Critics argue that Flock's claims about its impact on crime rates lack rigorous scientific backing and might not hold up under closer scrutiny. Despite these criticisms, some law enforcement officials praise the technology for its utility in solving cases. Skepticism remains among academics and some law enforcement officials regarding the actual efficacy of Flock's technology in reducing overall crime rates, suggesting a need for more transparent and comprehensive analysis.[44]

Controversies and litigation

[edit]

Privacy concerns

[edit]

There are privacy concerns about Flock's systems.[45][46][47][48] Flock's surveillance technology is often criticized for its broadening of public surveillance, particularly affecting minorities, and leading to a chilling effect on civil liberties, as described by privacy experts and organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation and the American Civil Liberties Union. The Electronic Frontier Foundation argues that ALPRs like Flock create more problems than they solve.[49] There are concerns that Flock's system may cause harm, especially to minorities.[50]

Privacy expert Jodi Daniels warns Flock's technology "creates an environment where individuals may feel as though they are under constant surveillance. This can lead to a chilling effect on free speech and other civil liberties, as people might become hesitant to express themselves or participate in certain activities due to the fear of being recorded and possibly monitored by law enforcement."[51]

The American Civil Liberties Union released a report in March 2022 criticizing both Flock Safety's business model and its products.[52] In 2023, the ACLU acknowledged some uses of ALPRS could be acceptable, but emphasized the need for careful controls:[14]

We don't find every use of ALPRs objectionable. For example, we do not generally object to using them to check license plates against lists of stolen cars, for AMBER Alerts, or for toll collection, provided they are deployed and used fairly and subject to proper checks and balances, such as ensuring devices are not disproportionately deployed in low-income communities and communities of color, and that the "hot lists" they are run against are legitimate and up to date. But there's no reason the technology should be used to create comprehensive records of everybody's comings and goings — and that is precisely what ALPR databases like Flock's are doing. In our country, the government should not be tracking us unless it has individualized suspicion that we're engaged in wrongdoing.

Flock states its cameras and technology only captures data from vehicles, and the machine learning is specifically designed not to identify people. Flock has defended itself against "myths" about license plate readers.[53] Although Flock Safety claims their cameras reduce crime, opponents argue that there is no clear evidence for this.[54] In 2023, Atlanta police (Cobb County) credited a Flock license plate recognition system for helping them track down a gunman.[55]

Flock's surveillance model has also brought debates into towns between supporters and opponents of the technology.[56][57][58][59] Menlo Park, California opted out of a contract in 2023, bucking trends of nearby cities.[60]

A 2023 report by the University of Michigan found:[61][62]

"Recent studies examining the accuracy of ALPRs show that they often misread license plates, leading to disastrous real-world consequences, including violent arrests of innocent people. ALPR errors arise not only from shortcomings internal to their technology but from the hot lists they depend on to provide matches.

Even when ALPRs work as intended, the vast majority of images taken are not connected to any criminal activity. As most jurisdictions have no policies regarding retention limits, many agencies keep these scans on innocent people indefinitely. This can allow the government to maintain an overarching and potentially unconstitutional level of surveillance and can lead to abuse.

In some instances, officers have misused confidential databases 'to get information on romantic partners, business associates, neighbors, journalists and others for reasons that have nothing to do with daily police work.' Professional abuse includes targeting religious minorities and communities of color. Reproductive rights advocates are now raising alarms about the ways police and others could use ALPRs for the targeting of abortion clinics in the wake of the Supreme Court's Dobbs decision that overturned Roe v. Wade."

Critics argue for stringent controls and limitations on ALPR use to prevent disproportionate impacts on marginalized communities and to safeguard against the creation of expansive surveillance databases. Inaccuracies in ALPR technology have led to wrongful arrests and privacy invasions, raising significant concerns about the technology's reliability and the potential for misuse.

Alleged Fourth Amendment violations

[edit]

In June 2024, a judge in Norfolk, Virginia ruled that collecting location data from the city's 172 Flock ALPRs constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment, and cannot be used as evidence in a criminal case when collected without a warrant. In his ruling, the judge likened ALPR location databases to tracking devices, whose use by police was previously found unconstitutional without a warrant in United States v. Jones.[63]

Later, in October 2024, the Institute for Justice filed a federal lawsuit against the Norfolk Police Department on behalf of two local residents, similarly asserting that the department's use of Flock ALPRs constitutes illegal surveillance in violation of the Fourth Amendment.[64][65][66][67]

Stalking

[edit]

In at least two documented cases, Flock ALPR systems have been misused by police officers to stalk their domestic partners.[68]

In October 2022, a police detective in Kechi, Kansas was found to have used Flock's system to follow his estranged wife over the course of a month. His department has access to Flock ALPR data from other cities' ALPR networks, including the Wichita Police Department, which allowed him to track his wife's whereabouts across multiple communities. Following an audit of officers' database access, the detective was arrested, and his state law enforcement certification was later revoked.[69][70]

In another case, the chief of police in Sedgwick, Kansas, Lee Nygaard, used Flock's systems to track his ex-girlfriend and her new boyfriend, searching for their vehicles on the Flock database more than 200 times from June to October 2023. He searched for their vehicles under the guise of investigating drug abuses, child abduction, and suspicious activity, and used a police vehicle to follow and harass his victims.[71] Nygaard resigned amidst the controversy, lost his law enforcement certification, and was sentenced to 18 months' probation. Flock refused media requests for an interview following the incident, and declined to comment on previous reports of abuses of their database.[68]

Incorrect scans

[edit]

In Española, New Mexico, two motorists were stopped and detained by police after Flock ALPRs mistook their vehicles for those associated with crimes. In one case, a 21-year-old woman was stopped after a Flock ALPR misread her vehicle's license plate as one reported stolen, and she and her 12-year-old sister were arrested at gunpoint before officers discovered the error. In the other, a 17-year-old high school student was stopped, searched, and arrested at gunpoint by a state trooper after his vehicle was photographed by a Flock ALPR and mistaken for a similar vehicle spotted near a crime scene. Both motorists sued the city of Española for damages, alleging negligence and violation of their rights under the Fourth Amendment.[72][73]

Unauthorized installations

[edit]

Flock has been accused by multiple state transportation and public safety agencies of installing and operating their devices without obtaining required permission. A 2024 Forbes report found that Flock had installed hundreds of devices on public roads in multiple states without securing necessary permits.[2][19]

In one case, in Treasure Island, Florida, a Flock ALPR was installed on Florida Department of Transportation right-of-way without the agency's permission. Days after its installation in February 2023, FDOT demanded its removal, an order Flock did not comply with until the following November. The agency later required Flock to conduct a review of all of its installations in Florida, which identified over 800 ALPRs out of regulatory compliance.[19]

From 2022 to 2024, the South Carolina Department of Transportation identified more than 200 Flock ALPRs installed on public roads without required permits. In July 2023, the agency issued a moratorium on new installations of Flock ALPRs, and ordered a safety and compliance review of all existing installations.[19]

Flock was sued in March 2023 by the North Carolina Alarm Systems Licensing Board, which accused the company of installing its devices for multiple years without obtaining a license from the board, which is required to install certain electronic security equipment in the state.[1] An injunction issued in the case in November 2023 prohibited Flock from installing any new equipment in North Carolina without securing a license;[74] a second injunction in March 2024 required Flock to apply for the license or face a ban from doing business in North Carolina.[75] Following the rulings, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill terminated a contract with Flock, citing the company's violation of state law.[74]

In September 2024, the Texas Department of Public Safety issued a cease and desist notice, ordering Flock to cease operations on private property in Texas until it obtained a required license to provide private security services in the state.[76] Flock announced in October that they had completed the Texas licensure process.[77]

References

[edit]
  1. ^ a b "Consent Order Continuing Preliminary Injunction: North Carolina Alarm Systems Licensing Board v. Flock Safety" (PDF). Wake County Superior Court. 2024-03-28. Retrieved 2024-10-23 – via DocumentCloud.
  2. ^ a b c "License Plate Surveillance Startup Broke The Law While Trying To Reduce Crime". Jalopnik. 2024-02-27. Retrieved 2024-02-27.
  3. ^ "News conference: Federal lawsuit filed against use of Flock cameras in Norfolk". WAVY-TV (Video) – via Facebook.
  4. ^ "Flock Safety Expands Into Drones for Law Enforcement with Acquisition of Aerodome". Flock Safety. 2024-10-16. Retrieved 2024-10-23 – via GlobeNewswire.
  5. ^ "'Possibility of misuse a real one': ACLU shares privacy concerns for police Flock Safety cameras". WUWM 89.7 FM - Milwaukee's NPR. 2023-09-08. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
  6. ^ Flock Safety. "Media Kit: Our Founding Story". Flock Safety. Retrieved 8 April 2022.
  7. ^ a b c Edmonson, Crystal (August 22, 2023). "Flock Safety cameras help police amid worker shortage, CEO Garrett Langley says (Podcast)". Atlanta Business Chronicle. Despite the article title, the linked source is an actual article and not a mere transcript of a podcast.
  8. ^ a b Southerland, Randy (2024-04-26). "Flock Safety employment reaches 900; develops new products". Atlanta Business Chronicle. Archived from the original on 2024-04-27.
  9. ^ "Flock Safety IPO - Investing Pre-IPO". forgeglobal.com. Retrieved 2023-12-09.
  10. ^ Cheng, Isabella (2022-02-16). "Flock Raises Another $150 Million, Valuation Now At $3.5 Billion". IPVM. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
  11. ^ a b c "Investing in Flock Safety". Andreessen Horowitz. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
  12. ^ "Flock Safety acquires Aerodome to expand into drone-based law enforcement solutions". Police1. 2024-10-16.
  13. ^ Katz-Lecabe, Mike (2022-04-01). "Dissection of Flock Safety Camera". The Center for Human Rights and Privacy.
  14. ^ a b c Marlow, Chad; Stanley, Jay (2023-02-13). "How to Pump the Brakes on Your Police Department's Use of Flock's Mass Surveillance License Plate Readers". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  15. ^ Murphy, Andy (2023-12-06). "What Is A Flock Camera?". thesecuredad. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  16. ^ Bunch, Edward III (2023-07-26). "A new kind of surveillance camera is coming to some Florida neighborhoods. What we know". Pensacola News Journal. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  17. ^ "Innovative license plate reader technology now in use on CU Boulder campus". CU Boulder Today. 2023-07-17.
  18. ^ "License Plate Readers". City of Lexington, Kentucky.
  19. ^ a b c d Brewster, Thomas (2024-02-27). "This $4 Billion Car Surveillance Startup Says It Cuts Crime. But It Likely Broke The Law". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2024-02-27. Retrieved 2024-02-27.
  20. ^ "Fort Worth, Texas, Deploys Solar-Powered License Plate Cameras". GovTech. 2021-08-23. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
  21. ^ "West Covina Police Install Network Of Flock Safety License Plate Reading Cameras In Strategic Locations - CBS Los Angeles". www.cbsnews.com. 2021-08-20. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
  22. ^ a b McNamara, Kevin (2022-03-25). "Ask 10: What are the solar-powered cameras attached to power poles?". KTVL. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  23. ^ O'Horo, Ryan (2023-11-21). "Surveillance as a Service Part 1: Flock Safety's Transparency Problem". Medium. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  24. ^ Axon. "Axon Partners with Flock Safety to Enhance Security for Cities and Neighborhoods". www.prnewswire.com. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  25. ^ "MyAxon". MyAxon. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  26. ^ "Flock Expands Into Gunshot And Audio Analytics (Raven)". IPVM. 2021-10-20.
  27. ^ Gagliano, Katie (2024-02-15). "Lafayette Police testing gunshot detection system in high-crime neighborhoods". The Advocate. Archived from the original on 2024-02-16.
  28. ^ Willard, Keenan (2023-12-08). "Fort Worth to add automatic gunshot audio detectors to some neighborhoods". NBC 5 Dallas-Fort Worth.
  29. ^ "Does My Neighborhood Need A Flock Safety License Plate Reader?". Flock Safety. 2019-04-19.
  30. ^ Polcyn, Bryan (2023-08-02). "Wisconsin AI-powered Flock cameras are tracking where you drive". FOX6 News Milwaukee. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  31. ^ a b Griffin, Joel (2019-11-05). "Flock Safety makes ALPR tech affordable for the masses". Security Info Watch.
  32. ^ "Licking Heights schools install flock cameras to detect criminals in the area". WBNS-TV (Video). 2023-11-16 – via YouTube.
  33. ^ a b Koch, Alexandra. "Man accused of stealing more than $5,500 worth of merchandise from Lowe's in Evans". The Augusta Chronicle. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  34. ^ a b c Brewster, Thomas (2024-05-06). "America's Biggest Mall Owner Is Sharing AI Surveillance Feeds Directly With Cops". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2024-05-06.
  35. ^ a b aidenmcguire (2024-02-01). "Flock Safety Cameras Help Keep Destiny USA and Syracuse Community Safe". Pyramid Management Group. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  36. ^ Creative, Cube. "Regency Park Greenwood - Safety Is a High Priority at Regency Park with FLOCK". regencyparkgreenwood.com. Retrieved 2024-05-15.
  37. ^ "Suburbs of Surveillance". Bloomberg.com. 2021-08-04. Retrieved 2023-12-10.
  38. ^ a b c Brewster, Thomas. "FedEx's Secretive Police Force Is Helping Cops Build An AI Car Surveillance Network". Forbes. Archived from the original on 2024-06-26.
  39. ^ Lin, Da (2023-12-01). "Privacy advocates accuse Kaiser of not following state law on license plate readers - CBS San Francisco". www.cbsnews.com. Retrieved 2024-11-17.
  40. ^ "Academy Sports Tackles Organized Retail Crime With Flock Safety". Flock Safety. 2024-08-29. Archived from the original on 2024-09-04. Retrieved 2024-11-17.
  41. ^ "Flock Safety Helps Dierbergs Market Solve ORC Case of $20K+ in Stolen Merchandise". Flock Safety. Retrieved 2024-11-17.
  42. ^ Morales, Eddie (2023-09-08). "'Possibility of misuse a real one': ACLU shares privacy concerns for police Flock Safety cameras". WUWM 89.7 FM - Milwaukee's NPR.
  43. ^ "10% of Reported Crime in the U.S. Is Solved Using Flock Technology". Flock Safety. 2024-02-14. Retrieved 2024-10-25.
  44. ^ a b c Farivar, Cyrus. "Flock Installed AI Cameras In This Small City And Claimed Crime Went Down. It Went Up". Forbes. Retrieved 2024-02-29.
  45. ^ Joh, Elizabeth (2019-09-24). "The Rise of Networked Vigilante Surveillance". Slate. ISSN 1091-2339. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
  46. ^ Sheridan, Stacey (2022-04-05). "Oak Park to get eight license plate reading cameras". Oak Park. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
  47. ^ Harwell, Drew (2021-10-21). "License plate scanners were supposed to bring peace of mind. Instead they tore the neighborhood apart". The Washington Post.
  48. ^ "'Possibility of misuse a real one': ACLU shares privacy concerns for police Flock Safety cameras". WUWM 89.7 FM - Milwaukee's NPR. 2023-09-08. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
  49. ^ Guariglia, Jason Kelley and Matthew (2020-09-14). "Things to Know Before Your Neighborhood Installs an Automated License Plate Reader". Electronic Frontier Foundation. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
  50. ^ Sheridan, Stacey (2022-04-07). "Community Relations Commission strongly opposes Flock". Oak Park. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
  51. ^ "Flock Cameras and Privacy Concerns: Balancing Security and Civil Liberties". JustLuxe. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
  52. ^ Stanley, Jay (2022-03-03). "Fast-Growing Company Flock is Building a New AI-Driven Mass-Surveillance System". American Civil Liberties Union. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
  53. ^ "6 Myths About License Plate Readers and Security Systems". www.flocksafety.com. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
  54. ^ Matsakis, Louise (2021-10-24). "Can License Plate Readers Really Reduce Crime?". Wired. ISSN 1059-1028. Retrieved 2022-04-08.
  55. ^ Murphy, Adam (2023-05-05). ""Camera network helped to find Midtown mass shooting suspect, police say"". Atlanta News First. Retrieved 8 May 2023.
  56. ^ Harwell, Drew (2021-10-23). "License plate scanners were supposed to bring peace of mind. Instead they tore the neighborhood apart". Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
  57. ^ "Council Debating License Plate Readers". Good Times. 2023-12-06. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
  58. ^ Writer, Billy Jarrell Staff (2023-12-08). "Citizens express dissent at Flock Safety security system informational meeting". Lincoln News Now!. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
  59. ^ Bradley, Kian (2023-11-09). "Mercer Island Debates Surveillance Cameras - The Urbanist". www.theurbanist.org. Retrieved 2023-12-11.
  60. ^ Rebosio, Cameron. "Citing privacy concerns, Menlo Park says no to automated license plate readers". www.almanacnews.com. Retrieved 2023-12-08.
  61. ^ "Automated License Plate Readers widely used, subject to abuse | Science, Technology and Public Policy (STPP)". stpp.fordschool.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
  62. ^ "Automated License Plate Readers: Legal and Policy Evaluation | Science, Technology and Public Policy (STPP)". stpp.fordschool.umich.edu. Retrieved 2023-12-07.
  63. ^ "Norfolk judge rejects police Flock camera evidence without warrant". The Virginian-Pilot. 2024-06-15. Archived from the original on 2024-06-24.
  64. ^ Daniel, Lars. "Privacy Violated, Warrantless Surveillance Alleges Flock Safety Camera Lawsuit". Forbes. Retrieved 2024-10-23.
  65. ^ Littlehales, Alex (2024-10-22). "Federal lawsuit filed in Norfolk over use of traffic surveillance cameras". WVEC-TV.
  66. ^ Brodkin, Jon (2024-10-22). "Lawsuit: City cameras make it impossible to drive anywhere without being tracked". Ars Technica. Retrieved 2024-10-23.
  67. ^ "Lee Schmidt and Crystal Arrington v. City of Norfolk, Norfolk Police Department, and Mark Talbot" (PDF). United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia – via Institute for Justice.
  68. ^ a b Stavola, Michael (2024-08-17). "Kansas police chief used Flock license plate cameras 164 times to track ex-girlfriend". The Wichita Eagle.
  69. ^ Stavola, Michael (2023-08-30). "Former Kechi PD supervisor who abused Wichita police cameras loses certification". The Wichita Eagle.
  70. ^ Baker, Joe (2022-10-31). "Kechi police lieutenant arrested for using police technology to stalk wife". KWCH-DT. Retrieved 2024-10-29.
  71. ^ Burnett, Cameron (2024-08-18). "Sedgwick police chief tracked ex-girlfriend 164 times using license plate cams". KAKE-TV. Retrieved 2024-10-29.
  72. ^ Haywood, Phaedra (2024-01-08). "Sisters sue Española over traffic stop they say was illegal". Santa Fe New Mexican.
  73. ^ "City Sued Over Multiple Erroneous Flock LPR Camera-Based Stops". IPVM. 2024-01-29. Retrieved 2024-11-01.
  74. ^ a b WRAL (2023-11-09). "Wake County judge blocks Flock safety from installing more license plate readers". WRAL.com. Retrieved 2024-10-23.
  75. ^ Dukes, Tyler (2024-03-28). "License plate reader firm must seek license for its tech — or face possible NC ban". The News & Observer. Archived from the original on 2024-04-01.
  76. ^ Flury, Jade (2024-09-26). "Texas DPS orders surveillance company to stop". KRIV-TV. Retrieved 2024-10-23.
  77. ^ "Company operating popular automatic license plate readers completes certification after cease and desist order by Texas DPS". khou.com. 2024-10-10. Retrieved 2024-10-23.
[edit]
Retrieved from "http://en.wiki.x.io/w/index.php?title=Flock_Safety&oldid=1260559685"