Funny how corporations and the government have us in a panopticon of virtual trackers, but only the flock cameras get pushback. Maybe it’s easier for people to comprehend and fight against because it’s a physical object.

Some states have had these for years, with zero complaints. I know at least my home state had tracking by license plate and facial identification 10+ years ago.

(I do not support Flock, but I wish people cared this much about all privacy violations.)

If hypothetically you're going to destroy a camera, consider the determination of police to investigate and the criminal charges before choosing your method. Spraying them with varnish is a lot more low key than shooting at or burning them, both of which are likely to attract investigations and felony charges.

Let us remember ALPRs have been around fora while now, and the fervor we're building to dismantle Flock we need to quietly extend to all ALPR services actively feeding unwarranted surveillance data to law enforcement and federal paramilitaries.

Much like health insurance CEOs getting waxed, destroying flock cameras seems to be one thing almost everyone agrees on.

This article reminded me to check deflock.me where I found that in the last 90 days my city finally got a Flock camera. There's only one but I've been driving by the damn thing every day on my way to work without realizing it.

I'd like to know whose responsible for it; City, County, or State but regardless I now have a decision to make.

Clearly professional operatives paid by China to ensure America falls behind in unwanted surveillance technology 🤔. /s

Oh no! Anyway...

The next stage of this is going to be models of Flock cameras that look like other common security cameras, or a Flock module that plugs into existing security cameras and adds them to the network.

If only people would be this militant about the sensor node they carry around all the time.