Flock cameras go up in flames as cops hunt suspected firebugs

Dougherty County Police Department (DCPD) near Albany, Georgia, is appealing for help from the local community after someone set two Flock Safety cameras on fire. Police initially investigated whether the automated license plate readers (ALPRs) had malfunctioned. After examining evidence from both scenes, however, officers reclassified the incidents as criminal damage to property. In an update communicated to journalists, reported by Fox 5 Atlanta, DCPD revealed nothing about what caused the fires at the 2400 block of Radium Springs Road near the intersection of Williamsburg Drive, nor did it offer any details about potential suspects that might help generate tips. The locations provided by police closely correspond to two reported ALPR locations mapped on the deflock.org platform, a community-driven project to map these cameras across the US. Flock, for the uninitiated, is a tech company that makes ALPRs, as well as other security devices such as cameras, gunshot audio detectors, drones, and more. However, mainly through controversial law enforcement partnerships, the company has - among some folk - built something of a negative brand image. Thousands of law enforcement agencies across the US deploy its technology, and stories of officials abusing ALPR systems are not rare. The Institute for Justice highlighted earlier this month at least 26 cases in which officers allegedly abused ALPR data to stalk romantic interests, with most of the incidents occurring since 2024. Likewise, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) claims less than 1 percent of the cars that pass through Flock's systems are connected to crime, but nevertheless have their details scanned and uploaded to a national database, which can be queried by law enforcement officials. And while Flock has repeatedly denied giving Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) direct access to its systems, reports have shown local police running Flock searches on the agency's behalf. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has also accessed Flock data while pursuing immigrants. Widespread concerns about Flock's role in potentially undermining the personal privacy of US citizens has also led to police departments, and others, ending their contracts with the company. The Los Angeles Police Department announced last week that it would let its Flock contract expire, three years after initially signing a deal to access its cameras, which, despite not being owned by the police, are deployed across the city. Dean Gialamas, the department's CIO, acknowledged that data privacy, security, and sharing concerns would have to be ironed out before the LAPD signed another Flock contract. The backlash has not been confined to canceled contracts and privacy campaigns. In several cities, Flock cameras have also been physically attacked. Jeffrey Scott Sovern, 41, was charged over a spate of alleged tampering with Flock ALPR cameras in North Suffolk, Virginia, between April and October 2025 - technology he claimed in a recent hearing was unconstitutional. He is accused of various acts against the cameras, ranging from repositioning the lenses away from roads, to disassembling the poles on which the cameras are mounted, and removing key components such as wires and batteries. Sovern faces 13 counts of destruction of property, six counts of petit larceny, and six counts of possession of burglary tools. Similarly, the cities of Eugene and Springfield, Oregon, canceled their Flock contracts in December 2025, less than two months after three poles supporting Flock camera installations were "cut down" by unknown vandals. Four of the total eight cameras deployed in Park Ridge, Illinois, were also knocked down over two nights in early June, a phenomenon police chief Bob Kampwirth reportedly guessed could be due to a TikTok trend encouraging people to destroy the technology. These are just a handful of the incidents in which people have allegedly taken their disdain for Flock technology into their own hands. The company is certainly aware of the attacks on its devices, and just last week published a blog reminding customers of its add-on protection plan, under which covered cameras can be repaired or replaced at no additional cost. It acknowledged the intentional damage but did not address the wider privacy backlash surrounding its products, instead dismissing rumors that vandals were hunting for precious metals inside the cameras. The Register contacted Flock and we'll update this story if we receive a response. (R)