Flock License Plate Readers

❗Article Status Notice: This Article is a stub

---

This article is underdeveloped, and needs additional work to meet the wiki's Content Guidelines and be in line with our Mission Statement for comprehensive coverage of consumer protection issues. Learn more ▼

Issues may include:

• This article needs to be expanded to provide meaningful information
• This article requires additional verifiable evidence to demonstrate systemic impact
• More documentation is needed to establish how this reflects broader consumer protection concerns
• The connection between individual incidents and company-wide practices needs to be better established
• The article is simply too short, and lacks sufficient content

How you can help:

• Add documented examples with verifiable sources
• Provide evidence of similar incidents affecting other consumers
• Include relevant company policies or communications that demonstrate systemic practices
• Link to credible reporting that covers these issues
• Flesh out the article with relevant information

This notice will be removed once the article is sufficiently developed. Once you believe the article is ready to have its notice removed, please visit the Moderator's noticeboard, or the Discord (join here) and post to the #appeals channel, or mention its status on the article's talk page.

Flock License Plate Readers

Basic Information
Release Year	2017
Product Type	Cameras, Security, Surveillance
In Production	Yes
Official Website	https://www.flocksafety.com/products/license-plate-readers

Flock License Plate Readers (previously known as Flock Safety Falcon), are a network of AI-powered surveillance cameras that continuously record vehicle data for law enforcement agencies. The system operates in over 5,000 communities across 49 U.S. states, performing over 20 billion vehicle scans monthly.

Taxpayer impact summary

Freedom

Residents & taxpayers have no mechanism to opt-out of Flock's surveillance network. The cameras operate 24/7 in public spaces, recording all passing vehicles regardless of consent. Unlike traditional security cameras that may be avoided by choosing different routes, Flock's expanding network of over 40,000 cameras makes avoidance increasingly difficult. The system uses AI to create "Vehicle Fingerprints" that identify vehicles by characteristics beyond license plates, including make, model, color, window stickers, & roof racks.

Privacy

While Flock Safety claims their system doesn't violate Fourth Amendment rights because "license plates are not personal information," federal courts have challenged this interpretation. In February 2024, a federal judge ruled that Norfolk, Virginia's use of 172 Flock cameras likely violates the Fourth Amendment, finding the system creates a "detailed chronicle of a person's physical presence compiled every day."

Data collected includes location history that can reveal sensitive information about medical visits, religious attendance, political activities, & personal associations. While Flock states data is deleted after 30 days, contracts grant them "perpetual, worldwide, royalty-free license" to use anonymized data indefinitely. The system shares data across a network of over 4,800 law enforcement agencies nationally.

"Anonymized data"

While Flock defines "Anonymized Data" as customer data "permanently stripped of identifying details and any potential personally identifiable information" , rendered so a person or entity "can no longer be identified directly or indirectly", this category still includes info like the vehicle make, model, color, location patterns, & other non–license-plate attributes.

Privacy researchers caution that mobility datasets labeled as "anonymized" can still be re-identified. A 2013 MIT study found that just four spatio-temporal points uniquely identified 95% of individuals in an anonymized location dataset. Civil liberties organizations such as the EFF & ACLU note that when detailed travel histories are retained, even without license plates, they're often able to be linked back to individuals when combined with other data sources.

Business model

Flock operates on a subscription model charging municipalities and law enforcement agencies $2,500 per camera annually plus installation costs. Private businesses including Home Depot & Lowe's also deploy cameras, sharing data with law enforcement. Contracts include automatic renewal clauses & limit municipal oversight capabilities, with cities unable to audit system operations or control how other agencies use shared data.

Market control

Flock Safety has rapidly expanded to become a dominant force in automated license plate recognition, operating in 49 states with over 40,000 cameras deployed. The company's network effect creates pressure for additional jurisdictions to join, as law enforcement effectiveness depends on network coverage. Several states have begun restricting access following privacy violations, with California, Illinois, and New York limiting data sharing after immigration and abortion-related tracking incidents.

Incidents

Law enforcement stalking incidents (2022-2025)

Many documented cases demonstrate abuse of Flock's surveillance capabilities by law enforcement officers:

Cops stalking their ex:

In October 2022, Kechi, Kansas Police Lieutenant Victor Heiar was arrested & later pleaded guilty to computer crimes & stalking after using Flock cameras 228 times over four months to track his estranged wife's movements.

In a separate Kansas incident, Sedgwick Police Chief Lee Nygaard accessed Flock data 164 times to track his ex-girlfriend before resigning after admitting to the misuse.

Abortion & immigration tracking (2025)

In May 2025, Johnson County, Texas sheriff's deputies used Flock's network to track a woman suspected of self-managing an abortion. They were conducting searches across multiple states including those where abortion is legal. The incident led Illinois officials to investigate and subsequently block 47+ out-of-state agencies from accessing Illinois ALPR data.

404 Media revealed over 4,000 searches by local and state police for federal immigration enforcement purposes, despite Flock having no formal ICE contract. A DEA agent was found using an Illinois police officer's credentials to conduct unauthorized immigration searches.

City rejections and terminations (2025)

Multiple cities have rejected or terminated Flock contracts following privacy concerns and effectiveness issues:

0.2% effectiveness rate, low arrests:

Austin, Texas terminated its contract in July 2025 after an audit revealed "systematic compliance failures" and only 165 arrests from 113 million license plate scans (0.2% effectiveness rate).

Denver City Council unanimously rejected a $666,000 contract extension in May 2025 following revelations of 1,400+ ICE-related searches in Colorado data.

San Marcos, Texas voted 5-2 to deny camera expansion after discovering no required audits had been conducted since 2022.

Oak Park, Illinois terminated their contract entirely following the Illinois investigation into illegal data sharing.

Constitutional challenges (2024-ongoing)

In February 2024, Federal Judge Mark Davis ruled that Norfolk, Virginia's use of 172 Flock cameras likely violates the Fourth Amendment, comparing the case to Carpenter v. United States regarding warrantless location tracking. The judge found it "difficult to drive anywhere of any distance without running into a camera."

False positive incidents (2025)

Held at gunpoint:

In Española, New Mexico, 21-year-old Jaclynn Gonzales and her 12-year-old sister were held at gunpoint & handcuffed after Flock's system mistook a "2" for a "7" on their license plate, falsely flagging their vehicle as stolen.

Security vulnerabilities (2024)

The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency identified 7 critical vulnerabilities in Motorola ALPR systems similar to Flock's, including hardcoded passwords & unencrypted data storage.

External links

• DeFlock live map of active ALPRs
• No ALPRS movement in United States