Those Flocking Cameras

Glenn Jacobs Just Exposed the Dark Truth About Flock Surveillance

Something significant is happening in Knox County, Tennessee, and Americans across the political spectrum should be paying attention.

First, let’s get one detail right because it matters: Glenn Jacobs is the mayor of Knox County, not the City of Knoxville. Wrestling fans know him by another name: Kane, the WWE legend. Today, however, Jacobs isn’t talking about wrestling. He’s raising questions about something considerably more consequential: how far government surveillance should be allowed to reach into the everyday movements of American citizens.

In July, Jacobs publicly urged the Knox County Commission to prohibit Flock cameras and similar automated license-plate-reader technology in the county. More recently, he called for a nationwide pause on further deployment, arguing that law enforcement technology must operate within constitutional boundaries. (Gerweck.net)

And the deeper you look into these cameras, the easier it becomes to understand his concern.

These Aren’t Just Traffic Cameras

Flock’s automated license plate readers photograph vehicles passing their locations and create searchable records associated with vehicle characteristics and license plates. The technology can be extremely useful to police investigating stolen vehicles, missing persons and serious crimes.

That public-safety benefit deserves acknowledgment.

But there is another side.

Reporting on Flock’s system has described features allowing officers to search vehicles not only by plate but by characteristics such as vehicle type, color and identifying features. Flock systems can also generate alerts when targeted vehicles pass cameras. Searches historically have not necessarily required officers to obtain a warrant first. (The Washington Post)

Think about what that means when thousands upon thousands of cameras become interconnected.

The issue isn’t merely whether one camera photographs your car.

The issue is whether a sufficiently large network can reconstruct where ordinary Americans travel, when they travel and potentially whom they visit.

That’s where a crime-fighting tool begins raising much larger Fourth Amendment and privacy questions.

Then Came the Abuse Cases

This debate is no longer purely hypothetical.

Recent investigations have documented allegations of law-enforcement personnel improperly accessing automated license-plate-reader systems, including cases involving officers accused of using surveillance capabilities to track women with whom they had personal relationships. The Washington Post documented how officers allegedly turned license-plate-reader networks into tools for tracking former or current partners. (The Washington Post)

Flock itself has responded to mounting criticism by announcing stronger safeguards. The company says it is making auditing features mandatory, requiring searches to be associated with case codes and reducing its default retention period from 30 days to seven days. (AP News)

That raises an unavoidable question:

If there were no legitimate concerns about abuse and oversight, why are stronger safeguards necessary now?

The reforms don’t prove that the entire system is malicious. They do demonstrate that concerns about access, accountability and misuse are serious enough to require changes.

Knox County Nearly Got Hundreds More

The controversy became especially relevant in East Tennessee after the Knox County Sheriff’s Office came close to installing nearly 300 additional Flock cameras.

That expansion has been halted for now, while existing cameras remain operational. Knox County officials scheduled an August 24 workshop involving the County Commission, Sheriff’s Office and Flock representatives to discuss the technology and privacy concerns. (

https://www.wvlt.tv

Jacobs’ position is fundamentally straightforward: law enforcement deserves effective tools, but those tools cannot outrun the Constitution.

He told Newsmax that the issue isn’t about depriving police of technology. It’s about determining how technology can be used appropriately and consistently with constitutional protections. (Currently)

That is exactly the debate America should be having.

The Bigger Question Nobody Can Ignore

Imagine a camera on one intersection.

Probably not particularly alarming.

Now imagine one on every major intersection.

Then every highway entrance.

Every neighborhood entrance.

Every shopping district.

Every county line.

Now connect those cameras to searchable databases.

Suddenly we’re no longer debating cameras.

We’re debating infrastructure capable of tracking movement.

And once such infrastructure exists, Americans shouldn’t merely ask what today’s government intends to do with it.

We should ask what tomorrow’s government could do with it.

Because constitutional protections weren’t created on the assumption that government officials would always be trustworthy. They were created precisely because concentrated power can eventually be abused.

This Isn’t Left Versus Right

Perhaps one of the most interesting developments surrounding Flock is that opposition isn’t falling neatly along traditional political lines.

Civil-liberties organizations, privacy advocates, conservatives, libertarians and officials from different political backgrounds have all raised concerns about automated license-plate-reader networks. More than 50 jurisdictions have reportedly ended relationships with Flock amid the broader controversy. (AP News)

That’s important.

Privacy shouldn’t become another red-team-versus-blue-team argument.

The Fourth Amendment doesn’t have a political party.

Neither does your license plate.

Neither does your daily commute.

Neither does your freedom to move around this country without assuming that every mile you travel belongs permanently inside somebody’s searchable database.

Flock Has a Side of the Story Too

Fairness demands acknowledging that Flock argues its technology saves lives and helps police solve crimes. There are documented examples of automated license-plate readers assisting authorities in locating missing children, stolen vehicles and criminal suspects. (People.com)

That creates the legitimate policy question America must answer:

How do we give police powerful investigative tools without creating powerful surveillance systems capable of being turned against innocent citizens?

The answer cannot simply be, Trust us.

Government power needs rules.

Access needs auditing.

Serious investigative searches may require judicial oversight.

Data retention needs limits.

Abuse needs consequences.

And citizens deserve to know exactly what information about their movements is being collected, how long it remains available and who can search it.

Kane Just Rang the Bell

Glenn Jacobs spent years walking into arenas as Kane.

Now the Knox County mayor is stepping into a completely different fight.

And whether Americans ultimately agree with banning Flock cameras, regulating them heavily or allowing them under strict constitutional safeguards, Jacobs has helped force an important question into public view:

At what point does public safety technology become mass surveillance?

Because technology doesn’t surrender power once society gives it away.

It becomes faster.

Cheaper.

Smarter.

More interconnected.

And increasingly invisible.

Flock calls its mission public safety.

Jacobs is asking Americans to consider the constitutional price.

Maybe it’s time every county commission, sheriff, police chief, state legislature and citizen in America asks the same question before another camera goes up:

Who is watching the watchers?

Because those flocking cameras aren’t merely looking for criminals.

They photograph everybody who drives past them.

And that changes the conversation entirely.

Your support keeps this mission moving forward. If you believe in what we’re doing and want to help us continue bringing important information into the light, please consider becoming a paid subscriber or making a donation through the link below.

Every subscription, every donation, and every share helps amplify the mission. Thank you for standing with us.

Support our mission