All new technology faces pushback. But the level of Orwellian panic instilled by Flock cameras is something new, and your responses to our latest reader ask on the divisive surveillance systems show it.
Pushback to these unbelievably ubiquitous traffic cameras – now hosted in 49 states – has ranged from outright vandalism to tepid concern in cities and states across the nation. From emotional testimony in a U.S. Senate Judiciary subcommittee to major civil liberties violation claims, the alarm bells are ringing. But its defenders remain firm that the benefits to crime fighting outweigh any liberties lost.
So we asked you, our readers, to weigh in. Do automatic license plate readers like Flock make us safer on the whole, or is the threat to privacy
too steep a price to pay?
Read a collection of your answers below. For more opportunities to weigh in, visit usatoday.com/forum, leave us a voicemail at (202) 655-3923 or drop us a note at forum@usatoday.com.
I can see Flock's benefits, but the costs are just too high
I understand that these surveillance systems work great in helping the police solve crimes. I also understand that if I had a loved one who were a victim of a serious crime, I'd probably be the first one to hope there were footage of suspects that could be identified.
Be that as it may, I just don't think everyone's movements should be recorded and on a database. I know my phone tracks me. I know that there are traffic cameras already. I just think this takes it a step too far. There should not be a database that has everyone who passes a camera stored in it. It's just one step too far, and I'm willing to forgo the benefit to put a line in the sand against the surveillance state this country is becoming. Take them all down.
I do use cameras on my personal property, but I am the one who has the footage of what happens in my home.
— Michael Lanowy, Rhode Island
Surveillance protects the innocent and exposes the guilty
As a hopefully good citizen of the USA, I'm glad for the surveillance. Only those with evil intentions seem to fear them. May they continue to protect the innocent and expose the guilty.
I hope that before accusations fly, there is a thorough investigation and that good, sound judgment is used by law enforcement. But I'm not concerned about privacy. Only those who are committing bad acts against others should fear the use of cameras.
— Judy Cacco, California
I live across from one of these cameras. Take them all down.
These Flock Safety cameras need to be outlawed nationwide; they are an invasion of our privacy. In fact, there is one on my street pointing directly toward my property.
Ever since President Donald Trump has been in office, all of our constitutional rights have been trampled on. This is just another part of the whole.
It's "1984" in real, everyday life. There is no need for these invasive cameras. What's next?
Beyond government use, I am concerned about these Big Tech companies expanding their unlawful prying into our personal lives.
It is illegal to destroy government property, of course. But to me, these cameras are illegal. They need to be removed now. If someone feels the need to disable them or protect private citizens from their overreach, then that should send a message to the owners of these cameras that they are not very popular.
— Rob Meyer, New Jersey
We need more accountability, not removal
I believe Flock cameras and the like are an excellent tool for investigating criminal activity and in trials. Access to the data needs accountability and consequences, not removal. Law enforcement can use it to reduce criminal activity and collect fines – as they should.
I have cameras in my own home for security, and because I like to know who is coming to my house. As for cameras outside my home, I'm not concerned since I'm not involved in illegal activity.
I disagree with the pushback and anyone removing the cameras. Just update the policies for accountability and the consequences of misuse. Those citizens should be tried and punished if found guilty of destroying equipment.
— Frank Overdyke, Florida
Flock surveillance is a constitutional violation, no question
This is Fourth Amendment abuse, full stop. George Orwell predicted and warned us of this. People's lives have been placed in imminent danger due to false alerts and misreads and stalking by officers.
People have been far too willing to sacrifice personal liberty for an artificial sense of security. This has been driven by less and less self-reliance, to a shift where individuals would rather rely on the government than on their own abilities.
Surveillance should be 100% off-limits without a warrant. Even the Patriot Act, which Congress passed in response to the 9/11 terrorist attacks, should be repealed. Its surveillance overreach is anything but patriotic.
Private companies and citizens, along with the government, will and have abused this technology. Each group is equally concerning, as they will work in concert with one another to achieve the power they desire.
Pushback is absolutely necessary. Data mining, such as using automated license plate readers and cell phone location data, has already been deemed unconstitutional unless a warrant has been obtained for that specific individual prior to the tracking. These devices are intentionally subverting the constitutional protections citizens are supposedly guaranteed.
— Brian Wallace, Kentucky
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY: I live across from a Flock camera. Take them all down | Your Turn
