quite a few in Brazos County and more coming
thoughts?
thoughts?
Post Reply
1 of 1
Flock cameras
1,441 Views |
25 Replies |
Last: 2 days ago by Koko Chingo
Not a fan of living in a surveillance state.
City of Bryan just approved more. That whole council needs out.
Queso1 said:
Not a fan of living in a surveillance state.
Destroy your phone then.
Crime is the driving force for these cameras. One "flock" camera that you have not considered is the surveillance cameras (e.g. ring door bell cameras) that are now standard on many houses. Are these cameras an invasion of our privacy too?
Private property vs public.
I dont like them either and I am a big police proponent. My bet is that this amount of surveillance hits the courts as a civil rights issue within a year or so.
I dont like them either and I am a big police proponent. My bet is that this amount of surveillance hits the courts as a civil rights issue within a year or so.
tu ag said:
Private property vs public.
I dont like them either and I am a big police proponent. My bet is that this amount of surveillance hits the courts as a civil rights issue within a year or so.
Most private surveillance cameras also record images on public property.
Quote:
Caught on camera: Driver injured in suspected DWI crash in Bryan, warrant sought
https://www.kbtx.com/2026/03/11/caught-camera-driver-injured-suspected-dwi-crash-bryan-warrant-sought/
If you go into the dispatch area at CSPD, you'd be shocked how many they have on their screens.
You missed my point. A private citizen recording something from their own property is a very different thing. The state collecting recordings on public property is very different and is a matter that will most likely hit the courts soon, because of the 4th amendment. It is still a civil rights issue.
The question is - does the state has the right to record everything we do without reasonable cause and a search warrant?
Big Brother come to life much?
The question is - does the state has the right to record everything we do without reasonable cause and a search warrant?
Big Brother come to life much?
Serious question here-
What can the state nefariously do with FLOCK camera data?
As anecdotal example, my little bro had his rims stolen off his grocery getter. Police used his camera footage from his house, neighbors camera footage and FLOCK camera data to find and convict the juveniles that did the deed and the adults taking them on the pirate excursions. As far as I am concerned they can come put one at the entrances to my neighborhood and I am fine with it.
What can the state nefariously do with FLOCK camera data?
As anecdotal example, my little bro had his rims stolen off his grocery getter. Police used his camera footage from his house, neighbors camera footage and FLOCK camera data to find and convict the juveniles that did the deed and the adults taking them on the pirate excursions. As far as I am concerned they can come put one at the entrances to my neighborhood and I am fine with it.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
another serious question here-
Are you guys OK with these cameras? What about the google street view cameras that took this image?
Are you guys OK with these cameras? What about the google street view cameras that took this image?
Officer Jones abusing the data to watch a neighbor lady he is interested in.
President AOC having the FBI monitor political enemies.
The sheriff in LA who hates prolifers and doxes them for protesting.
The DA who wants the source of a journalist, so they get it from cameras.
There are a multitude of ways this data can be abused and violate civil rights.
President AOC having the FBI monitor political enemies.
The sheriff in LA who hates prolifers and doxes them for protesting.
The DA who wants the source of a journalist, so they get it from cameras.
There are a multitude of ways this data can be abused and violate civil rights.
EliteElectric said:
What can the state nefariously do with FLOCK camera data?
There have already been several documented cases of public officials abusing this technology for their own nefarious purposes. Here is one case where a police officer was using the camera data to track and keep tabs on his girlfriend and her ex.
Law enforcement addresses growing network of Flock Safety cameras across Brazos County
https://www.kbtx.com/2026/03/12/law-enforcement-addresses-growing-network-flock-safety-cameras-across-brazos-county/
https://www.kbtx.com/2026/03/12/law-enforcement-addresses-growing-network-flock-safety-cameras-across-brazos-county/
AgTrip said:Queso1 said:
Not a fan of living in a surveillance state.
Destroy your phone then.
You can turn your phone off any time you like.
AgTrip said:Queso1 said:
Not a fan of living in a surveillance state.
Destroy your phone then.
and Alexa....I'd never put one of those up in my house.
AgTrip said:Queso1 said:
Not a fan of living in a surveillance state.
Destroy your phone then.
Not sure if response comparing my elective use of a phone to a government actively surveilling citizen was a joke or a rationalization.
However, there are people that want 24/7 surveillance because "if ur not doing anything wrong, you shouldn't be concerned."
EliteElectric said:
another serious question here-
Are you guys OK with these cameras? What about the google street view cameras that took this image?
Those are traffic detection cameras. The detect if a car is in the lane(s) opposite them and thus control the traffic signal.
JB said:
Holy crap. That video is crazy!
Mr.Short-termMemory said:
Law enforcement addresses growing network of Flock Safety cameras across Brazos County
https://www.kbtx.com/2026/03/12/law-enforcement-addresses-growing-network-flock-safety-cameras-across-brazos-county/
Coming from the same people that refuse to release body camera footage from a questionable shooting incident. Sorry, don't trust them.
And the quality on them is not high enough to read a license plate (or even make out make/model sometimes).
For me I can see both sides and value the good it can do. For now, I am against them.
One is trust. Not all police are bad, besides just a few bad apples, but they are also run by governments. Governments are not known to be the epitome of integrity.
We do have a constitutional right to privacy and need to protect that. I have seen some people argue that the roads are public. While true, flock cameras do more than just take your vehicles photo on a public roadway. They use that data to create patterns and hypothetical assumptions based on that data using AI. That's where its just more than a photo and becomes a violation of privacy.
Then there is the access & control portion. Starting with law enforcement. No police force of any size has a force where all 100% are above board. It is not just local law enforcement who have access to Flock data. You have other staff who can access the data, admin, IT, service & maintenance personnel many of which are contractors. And the system uses AWS for their backbone. The span of control goes way outside of College Station.
Finally, Flock camera data being used against innocent people because they match an algorithm. Even the process of being found innocent can be stressful, expensive, and time consuming. Not everyone has the ability to defend themselves. It really penalizes low income people when you are dealing with civil fines. They cannot afford the fine and an attorney for an hours rate ia about the same as the fine.
A couple of examples:
In Colorado a police officer used Flock data to locate a vehicle that matched the relative description of a package thief - woman driving a green truck. They used Flock data to find a woman who lived nearby and drove close that area multiple times. They showed up and issued a summons.
No proof it was her they didn't even have a specific make or model of truck. Fortunately, the person charged had a Rivian with its own built-in camera and GPS log that's timestamped.
The cop was rude and pushy and would accept any response accept guilty.
Short version:
Long version:
In Bexar they used Flock cameras to track cars who made trips from outside the area and drove close to the border, then fabricate a reason to pull them over if they didn't have anything else like speeding. They would bring in a dog that had a 100% alert rate and go through everyone's vehicle searching for drugs. They had a very low success rate too.
Sorry the video is long but very informative:
One is trust. Not all police are bad, besides just a few bad apples, but they are also run by governments. Governments are not known to be the epitome of integrity.
We do have a constitutional right to privacy and need to protect that. I have seen some people argue that the roads are public. While true, flock cameras do more than just take your vehicles photo on a public roadway. They use that data to create patterns and hypothetical assumptions based on that data using AI. That's where its just more than a photo and becomes a violation of privacy.
Then there is the access & control portion. Starting with law enforcement. No police force of any size has a force where all 100% are above board. It is not just local law enforcement who have access to Flock data. You have other staff who can access the data, admin, IT, service & maintenance personnel many of which are contractors. And the system uses AWS for their backbone. The span of control goes way outside of College Station.
Finally, Flock camera data being used against innocent people because they match an algorithm. Even the process of being found innocent can be stressful, expensive, and time consuming. Not everyone has the ability to defend themselves. It really penalizes low income people when you are dealing with civil fines. They cannot afford the fine and an attorney for an hours rate ia about the same as the fine.
A couple of examples:
In Colorado a police officer used Flock data to locate a vehicle that matched the relative description of a package thief - woman driving a green truck. They used Flock data to find a woman who lived nearby and drove close that area multiple times. They showed up and issued a summons.
No proof it was her they didn't even have a specific make or model of truck. Fortunately, the person charged had a Rivian with its own built-in camera and GPS log that's timestamped.
The cop was rude and pushy and would accept any response accept guilty.
Short version:
Long version:
In Bexar they used Flock cameras to track cars who made trips from outside the area and drove close to the border, then fabricate a reason to pull them over if they didn't have anything else like speeding. They would bring in a dog that had a 100% alert rate and go through everyone's vehicle searching for drugs. They had a very low success rate too.
Sorry the video is long but very informative: