Flock Cameras
- Brian Ceccarelli
- 3 days ago
- 4 min read
Updated: 3 hours ago
Flock cameras. As a photo-enforcement expert, I have been asked to give my opinion on flock cameras.
My conclusion first. I do not approve of flock cameras.
Definition: What is a flock camera?
A flock camera, like in the picture above, is a camera that takes videos of anything. It is 24/7 surveillance on steroids. They come with optional audio capture. A flock camera can identify your license plate number and thus track your vehicle's whereabouts. It uses machine learning (a part of AI) to identify the make, model, color and unique features of your car like roof racks and bumper stickers. The technology is not limited to license plate reading. Used with Amazon Rekognize (facial recognition), a flock camera can identify people walking on the ground. It is the perfect spying device.
* The word "flock" comes from the company named "Flock Safety" founded in 2017. The branding evokes the concept of a group or a community ("a flock") working together to stay safe.
* Flock cameras are indeed a form of photo-enforcement. It is the search half of "search and seizure". In so doing, their use violates the Fourth Amendment. The government is searching everybody without probable cause or warrant. The flock cameras are much more than a "transitory stake-out on public property". I refer you to the 2012 case of United States v. Jones.
Before the invention of cameras, as in the days of our Founding Fathers, searches had to be done on-premise. We think of a policeman frisking you, or the police showing up at your front door demanding entry. But searches are no longer limited to on-premise. Searches can be done remotely.
The Contention
The contention is that flock cameras put too much power into the hands of government while the police argue that cameras make great criminal catching tools. Everyone agrees that cameras make great criminal catching tools. But the problem is that one cannot trust the police to confine its use of cameras to catch bad guys. The police are as human as the rest of us. Do a Google News search on "police abuse of flock cameras". You will see. There is also a worse possibility: what the government deems "bad" changes with time.
Think about how a nefarious government could use flock cameras. For example, imagine the Nazi regime identifying the ethnicity of a person by having the AI analyze the features of the person’s face.
James Madison wrote our Bill of Rights to protect individuals' liberties. Madison foresaw that government would attempt to acquire a level of power and use that power against good people. Madison and his colleagues saw it happen. The worry was that government would become like King George III's and exhibit the list of abuses and usurpations enumerated in our Declaration of Independence.
Sometimes people make flock cameras a privacy issue. This argument misses the mark. We are talking about government power, not privacy:
We are not talking about single license plate number recorded in a still image at one public intersection in order to dispense a one-time red-light camera ticket.
We are not talking about a private cell phone company using the cellular network to monitor your location. You give the phone company permission to monitor your location.
We are talking about a government using the power of government to monitor everyone's location in real-time without geographic restrictions without your permission for any purpose good or bad.
Public property does not belong to the government. It belongs to the public. Examples, the side of the road is called the "public" right-of-way. Sidewalks are called public sidewalks.
Similarity with Other Types of Photo-Enforcement
All types of photo-enforcement blame an unsuspecting public for government abuses.
Red-light cameras profit from the bad math of the equation DOTs use to set yellow light durations. The mistake makes everyone infrequently but consistently run red lights. Most violations are within a second, imperceptible to the naked eye.
Speed-cameras profit from posted speed limits set lower than engineering principles. Engineering requires the speed limits to be set to a natural speed which most drivers travel. Natural is safest. Slower means less safe. We see 70 mph on I-40, not 45 mph. If the DOT posts 45 mph, how many of us are going to "speed"?
Bus stop-arm cameras profit from school bus drivers who extend the stop-arms without giving oncoming drivers the distance to stop or the necessary line of sight. School bus drivers are not engineers.
Stop-sign cameras profit from the inability of a stop sign to conform 24/7 to the most fundamental principle of western law: Cicero's right reason. "The law exists only when there is right reason for it." Practical application: You come to stop sign in the middle of the night. When there is no one is in sight, there is no right reason to come to a complete stop. Cicero would say, "Therefore the law does not exist in this case. No fine. No penalty."
Flock cameras exist because the police make the mistake of not being willing to do their job under the Fourth Amendment. The police deceive the public using "safety" as justification. There is no justification for flock cameras.
All cameras misrepresent their purpose.
"Flock Safety", "Red-light Camera Safety", "Speed Camera Safety", "Bus Stop-Arm Safety Cameras", "Automated Traffic Enforcement Safety Devices". They all invoke the word "Safety". It is a ruse. A misrepresentation to their underlying purpose. It is fraud.
Governments misrepresent the statistics to justify cameras. For example, "We are going to put a red-light camera at this intersection because there are T-bone crashes." Upon discovery, the truth differs: There is 1 T-bone crash in 10 years, 100,000 red-light runners per T-bone crash, and 90% of the crashes are caused by the DOT, not the driver. For school bus camera justification: "Bus stop-arm cameras stop child deaths." Truth is that there 1 child death per 20 years per State and 70% of those are caused by the bus driver running into the child.
Flock Cameras Difference
As opposed to other types of photo-enforcement, I cannot see how flock cameras financially profit the government. However, I can see how businesses would profit. The flock camera companies make a lot of profit. And a system of flock cameras is like cookies in a web browser. They know where you have been.
Comments