Congressman Thomas Massie has put forth a proposal to eliminate federal funding for municipalities and police departments that utilize Flock cameras and similar automatic surveillance systems.
I’ll soon be sponsoring a bill to withhold federal money from municipalities and police departments that deploy Flock (and other style) cameras to surveil law abiding citizens. pic.twitter.com/FGzE69psxS
— Thomas Massie (@RepThomasMassie) July 25, 2026
Massie is committed to advancing this legislation in the House of Representatives.
Founded in 2017 in Atlanta, Flock Safety produces internet-connected cameras that capture images of passing vehicles, read license plates, and identify vehicle characteristics such as make, model, and color. The company claims not to use facial recognition technology and typically retains data for 30 days, unless local regulations stipulate otherwise.
In various states, local governments are reassessing their use of Flock cameras. The Los Angeles Police Department has suspended its collaboration with the company amid privacy concerns, data sharing issues, and contractual conditions.
Monroe County in Indiana voted to terminate its contract early. In Florida, Leon County has delayed funding for additional cameras due to resident inquiries regarding data collection, storage, and sharing practices.
Critics of Flock argue that these systems are employed beyond their stated purposes, which include crime investigation and locating missing persons. The Institute for Justice has documented over twenty instances where law enforcement allegedly used the cameras to monitor current or former romantic partners.
The Electronic Frontier Foundation claims that during protests, including the No Kings movement in 2025, law enforcement accessed license plate databases. In the same year, a group reported that Texas police requested Flock data while investigating an abortion case initially described as a missing persons case by authorities.
Citizens dissatisfied with surveillance measures are also taking action. The Guardian reported 33 incidents of damage or destruction of cameras across 23 states, with locals painting over lenses or physically removing the devices.
Flock Camera. Source: The Guardian.“It’s just another way to gather information and spy on us. I have a constitutional right to privacy. I’m a law-abiding citizen, and I don’t need someone sticking their nose in my business,” stated 77-year-old protester Carl Gann.
In response to the backlash, Flock’s CEO Garrett Langley apologized for his previous comments labeling protesters against surveillance as a “terrorist organization.” He acknowledged that some of the criticism directed at the business was warranted.
It’s worth noting that in June, Bristol disabled its AI crime risk models concerning children due to inaccuracies.