Key Points
- Rep. Thomas Massie is set to propose a bill that would cut federal funding for agencies using Flock cameras.
- Local governments nationwide, from California to Indiana, are halting or reassessing their use of Flock cameras due to public backlash.
- Flock CEO Garrett Langley has issued an apology for previously labeling anti-surveillance activists as "terrorists."
As opposition to Flock Safety's automated license plate reader (ALPR) cameras intensifies, the debate has shifted from city councils to Capitol Hill, where lawmakers are preparing to introduce legislation aimed at restricting federal funding for agencies that utilize this technology. Communities across the United States are now re-evaluating their reliance on Flock cameras amid growing criticisms.
Critics argue that Flock's technology has been misused in ways that go beyond its intended purpose of crime investigation and locating missing persons. A recent report by The Institute for Justice revealed numerous instances where police officers have resigned or faced criminal charges for allegedly using ALPR systems to track former or current romantic partners.
In February, a Milwaukee officer was charged for using the system to monitor a romantic partner and an ex-partner. Later, an internal affairs detective investigating the case was arrested for similar offenses involving personal tracking.
Privacy advocates point out that the technology's applications extend further. The Electronic Frontier Foundation has reported that law enforcement agencies used license plate databases during protests, including the No Kings protests in 2025. Additionally, Texas deputies were found to have queried Flock data during an abortion investigation initially described as a missing-person case.
The backlash has escalated beyond public forums, with activists across the nation vandalizing, disabling, or destroying Flock cameras as a form of protest. The Guardian documented at least 33 incidents of such actions across 23 states, with online communities sharing strategies for evading and obstructing the cameras. Some individuals now face criminal charges for allegedly destroying multiple devices.
Founded in 2017, Flock Safety, based in Atlanta, offers internet-connected cameras that automatically capture images of vehicles, read license plates, and utilize computer vision to identify various vehicle characteristics. Law enforcement agencies can access the database for criminal investigations, receive alerts about vehicles linked to cases, recover stolen vehicles, and assist in locating missing individuals.
Flock asserts that its cameras do not employ facial recognition technology and typically retain data for 30 days unless local laws stipulate otherwise. CEO Garrett Langley emphasized that the company takes privacy issues seriously, suggesting that many critics may change their perspective once they comprehend the technology's actual functions. "Once they understand what the technology actually does, not what it might do in 50 years, not what someone thinks it could do, but what it actually does day in and day out, it takes a picture of a car. Most people go, 'This makes a lot of sense. I want my kids to be safe,'" Langley stated in an interview with ABC7.
On Saturday, Congressman Thomas Massie announced his intention to introduce legislation that would withhold federal funds from municipalities and police departments that utilize automated license plate reader systems, including Flock cameras.
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
This proposed legislation follows numerous controversies surrounding Flock cameras throughout the country.
In St. Petersburg, Florida, 77-year-old Carl Gunn has garnered attention for his solo protests beneath Flock cameras, using a sign to obstruct their view. Gunn expressed his concerns, stating, “This is just another thing to take our information and to spy on us. I have a constitutional right to my privacy. I’m a law-abiding citizen, and I don’t need anyone sticking their nose in my business. And if they do, I’m going to chop it off.”
In Fresno, California, residents filled a community meeting to urge officials to remove Flock cameras, claiming the technology allows for extensive government surveillance. Police defended the cameras, arguing they have aided investigations into homicides and shootings and reiterated that facial recognition is not utilized. "We have to find a balance between safety and liberty," Fresno Police Chief Mindy Casto reportedly stated.
However, some law enforcement agencies are reconsidering their use of Flock cameras. Recently, the Los Angeles Police Department suspended its contract with Flock due to concerns regarding privacy, data sharing, and security. Monroe County, Indiana, also voted to terminate its contract a year early, despite acknowledging the cameras' role in solving serious crimes. Earlier in July, Leon County, Florida, delayed additional funding for Flock cameras after residents raised questions about data collection, storage, and sharing practices.
In response to the growing scrutiny, Langley recently apologized for his earlier comments calling anti-Flock activists a "terroristic organization," admitting it was a mistake. He noted that the company is now more focused on listening to critics while trying to balance public safety with privacy concerns. "My comments were a mistake, and I apologize,” he remarked to Forbes. “There are groups today that have real valid criticisms of the business, and I think what's changed for us is, as we've listened to them and heard them out, what we're trying to do is find this balance. We believe in a world where we can have safety and privacy.”