Automatic license plate readers, aka Flock cameras, have become a hot topic, as they pop up around the state. About 20 Delaware municipalities use them in conjunction with their police departments, but opponents worry about privacy issues and misuse by officers. Have you encountered these devices? Do you think they are helpful? Or are you concerned about what’s being tracked?
I have no problem with the cameras’ use by law enforcement but am concerned about how Flock might share or sell information to third parties. European nations seem to be taking a much more aggressive stance in favor of citizens’ privacy than we are in the U.S. Where do Delaware’s U.S. senators and representative stand on this issue? — Pete Harrigan
There are police across the country who have been caught using them to stalk people. I’m a big “back the blue” person, but there are some really bad apples. — Tracey Moore
Take ’em out! — Gary Sparks
The U.S. Supreme Court has established that the government generally needs a warrant to track, record or store detailed data on citizens, particularly when it involves modern technology, like cellphone location history. This represents a significant shift from older rulings that suggested that citizens had no privacy expectation in data held by third parties (like phone companies). — Connie Grabowski
I don’t agree with them. But you have no right to privacy while in public. It’s no different than someone taking pictures/recordings from public areas. — Jerry Wales
Love ’em! — Mick Dunaway
People need to stop spreading false information about Flock cameras. Flock cameras are not for facial recognition. They are license plate readers. — Sandy Johnson
Smarter people than me have written much more about the idea that we don’t surrender all privacy rights just by stepping outside. There’s plenty of cases where the cameras flag someone incorrectly, and innocent people get detained, plus documented cases of abuse from police officers using these dragnets for personal vendettas. These things present real harms, which outweigh any claimed benefit of public safety, and those harms can’t be dispelled by shrugging and saying, “Well, they’re in public. So what?” If the police have reason to suspect someone, let them get a targeted warrant to investigate that case. It isn’t right that everybody gets put under surveillance on the off chance that it might help solve a crime later. There’s a balance to be had. — Tyler Gerry
Hacksaw them down. Police have already used them against people. — Crystal Hamilton
I’m not a criminal, so I’m not worried about them. — Michael Campbell
I think they should pay the car owner a royalty, since they are profiting from using our information. — Michael Arant
They should have never been put up without public approval. — John W. Dee
Get rid of them! It’s yet another example of government overreach. No government has the right to track its citizens unless a specific citizen has committed a crime, or the law enforcement entities in that area believe that specific citizen is an imminent threat. — Chelle Bachman
As long as you don’t do any wrongful acts, no worries. — John A. Endres
