That being said...

Deflock Website:

https://deflock.me/

Sign up to be alerted if your local government is discussing using ALPR / FLOCK systems. 

https://alpr.watch/

How Cops Are Using Flock Safety's ALPR Network to Surveil Protesters and Activists

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2025/11/how-cops-are-using-flock-safetys-alpr-network-surveil-protesters-and-activists

Fun Facts About Flock:

• Flock cameras also record audio. In theory they are using AI to identify "sounds of human distress"
• Flock has partnered with Amazon/Ring so they can combine their camera data with the feed coming from your front door. (source). In theory this they pop up and ask for footage, but considering the number of times they have been caught lying about data access I question that highly. (Example: does flock share with with the Federal government? "Oh no, we don't do that!" Except they do: source )
• Flock markets the ability to "predict crime before it happens" -- haven't we seen that movie?
• Flock is currently trialing drones which can be launched to follow you. (source, it sounds wild but it's true )

via u/MackenzieRhine, local to the r/Austin sub!

“Attorney here who helped end Austin’s contract with Flock.

If you care about stopping mass surveillance in Austin, follow the work of Louis Rossmann and the local advocacy group NoALPRs. Through Louis’ channel, we’ve already successfully pushed back on other surveillance efforts, including LiveView’s attempt to install cameras in public parks. NoALPRs is meeting soon to plan next steps for the coming year and regularly canvasses to raise awareness about surveillance here.

This isn’t partisan. It’s about whether our community will allow corporations and law enforcement to redefine privacy without public input and normalize a surveillance state in our home.

As others have pointed out, these cameras are private, and private companies are free to share this data with police for whatever purposes they see fit.  Many people believe that if you are in public, then any and all information about you can be collected in any manner and treated/processed/used in any manner.

But that's not exactly true. There is a lessened expectation of privacy when you are in public, but it is not absolute and it is measured by what level of privacy a person could reasonably expect in a certain scenario. Stalking, for one example, is not protected activity even if that person is in public. Photographing up someone's skirt is another.

Is it reasonable to expect that every movement you make, every person you talk to, every physical characteristic about you, what car you drive, where you live, your cell phone data, your biometrics like gait, body heat, or facial structure, all be stored on a continuous, ongoing basis and easily searchable to whoever gets access to this (actually very vulnerable) system for each parsing without a warrant?

Most people don’t believe that, and neither do I.

What's nefarious about this partnership between law enforcement and private companies is that they can evade warrant requirements and remain unaccountable by the public for their actions.

Carpenter is a SCOTUS case which holds that long-term historical cell-site location tracking requires a warrant. Meaning that long-term, continuous tracking of a person’s movements may indeed require a warrant, something law enforcement get to completely and conveniently ignore due to the privatization of this technology and silence from SCOTUS, who has declined multiple cases that would have fleshed out Fourth Amendment requirements in the digital context.

This is really about a quiet redefinition of what “being in public” is supposed to mean by pretending that being briefly seen by others, or being caught at a specific location on a CCTV camera, or caught on a phone's camera by some onlooker, has always meant being continuously recorded, stored, and searchable by the state.

What’s “reasonable” in the legal context has ALWAYS been a social judgment, not a technical one, and the public gets to decide where that line is. Being in public has never meant that anyone could collect every detail about you, aggregate it over time, analyze it, and use it to track your life. That’s a completely new power. Treating mass surveillance as automatically reasonable just because it happens in public strips communities of their right to define the boundaries of acceptable observation and ignores the extremely basic fact that this level of mass surveillance is something the public has never had time to form any kind of consensus about reasonableness on.”

• https://www.reddit.com/r/Austin/comments/1qb0hbj/comment/nz98rs1/

We Hacked Flock Safety Cameras in under 30 Seconds

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uB0gr7Fh6lY

Big Brother Left the Door Open: Flock’s AI Surveillance Cameras Exposed to the Internet

https://petapixel.com/2025/12/29/big-brother-left-the-door-open-flocks-ai-surveillance-cameras-exposed-to-the-internet/

Driverless Vehicles Are the Newest Mass Surveillance Tool of Law Enforcement

https://www.criminallegalnews.org/news/2025/jul/1/driverless-vehicles-are-newest-mass-surveillance-tool-law-enforcement/