

There’s been like 14 similar cases of this.
I imagine the Flock techs, installing a fleet of cameras for the local fuzz, do training seminars where they encourage exactly this kind of thing (surveilling romantic partners). Still, the fact remains that the fuzz have good reason to know that that in particular is not allowed under any circumstances.


Yeah, I don’t know what’s going down, so, one of these days I suppose, I’ll get pinched.
I live in a medium-sized town with a dozen Flock cameras, which the police shrouded in garbage bags a couple of weeks ago (to defuse public outrage and ward off vandalism I suppose). Two days ago, the Common Council voted to break the Flock contract. The issue has been unsatisfactorily explained in the news. I mean — what did city government think would happen to the data? Surely they knew it would be kept for awhile and be searched. News makes it sound like they flipped when Flock tried to sell them a five-year traffic-pattern analysis.
The story (above) shines a (feeble) light on what may have gone wrong. It appears that police have been taking license numbers of cars that have been parked in shady locations and running those numbers against cameras all over creation to see whether they get hits in other parts of the country. The last thing local authorities want is an out-of-town authority charging in and following a lead on a suspicious vehicle up to no good in around here. That’s not what they bought the Flock cameras and put them up for. They were misled that the data would remain local for local use. I still don’t get the angst, though.
All I know is that I can’t get a hamburger to go, drive to a city park, eat it, and take a half-hour nap without some plain-clothes cop or vigilante waking me to ask what I’m waiting for.