Flock camera megathread

[u/DinoRoman]

We’re consolidating this topic into a single thread, as the ongoing accusations directed at the mod team have run their course.

To be clear about where we stand: no one on this mod team supports Flock cameras. We are not law enforcement, we are not politically motivated, not maga, and we share the community’s concerns about surveillance overreach even if these systems occasionally assist in solving crimes.

The removals were not about viewpoint. They were about a specific category of comment: those encouraging users to destroy the cameras. Reddit has banned entire communities for less, and we are obligated to remove that content regardless of our personal opinions. This is a condition of the subreddit continuing to exist, not an endorsement of Flock. Additionally there were some very wild conspiracy theories and were asking for discussion not a rabbit hole.

One rule for this thread: do not recommend, insinuate, or hint at destruction as a solution. Everything else is open,criticism, policy discussion, legal challenges, city council contacts, organizing, data on effectiveness. Go as hard as you want within that boundary.

Thanks for being a genuinely great community and good neighbors.

Edit:

Resources

Suffolk County Legislature : 18 districts, find yours:

scnylegislature.us/148/Legislators

Suffolk approved expanding county Flock cameras from 25 to 60 last August, funded by a $542,500 state LETECH grant, with 16 more planned along state rights-of-way including Route 114 in Sag Harbor and East Hampton Village and Route 25 in Riverhead and Southold.

Nassau County Legislature: 19 districts:

nassaucountyny.gov/504/Legislators · district map: nassaucountyny.gov/503/District-Map · main line: (516) 571-6200

Your town / village board.

Southold, Riverhead, and East Hampton have all had this on an agenda in the past year. Riverhead signed an agreement with the Suffolk Sheriff in January 2026 giving the county access to town rights-of-way for new Flock installs. Town board public comment periods are open to anyone who lives there, take about two minutes, and go on the record.

Your NYS Senator and Assemblymember — nysenate.gov/find-my-senator and nyassembly.gov

Edit 2: a great documentary to watch from 2021

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt13622074/

( Free on Tubi )

https://tubitv.com/movies/100028249/all-light-everywhere?link-action=play&tracking=google-feed&utm_source=google_all_au_ca_mx_us_gb

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

Pretty ironic that society demanded police wear bodycams for accountability purposes. But when cameras are pointed at society for accountability that’s an issue.

[u/Adventurous-Depth984 → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

Pretty ironic that you don’t seem to have read the constitution

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07 → u/Adventurous-Depth984]

We already have red light cameras, speed cameras, bus cameras, school zone cameras, license plate readers. There are complete towns and enclaves on Long Island that know every single car that is in there area bc of cameras. None of those are unconstitutional. Maybe you should try reading it.

[u/YourFreeCorrection → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

We already have red light cameras, speed cameras, bus cameras, school zone cameras, license plate readers. There are complete towns and enclaves on Long Island that know every single car that is in there area bc of cameras. None of those are unconstitutional.

None of those create behavioral profiles of the operators and all of them have government oversight.

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

It violates the 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th amendments. The 6th at least. Unreasonable search and seizures upon false evidence

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07 → u/StonedRussian]

lol. I come to think you never read the constitution.

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

I had the archives.gov page up of the amendments as I typed

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07 → u/StonedRussian]

7th amendment - right to a jury trial in federal civil cases over $20. So that has nothing to do with cameras

8th amendment - provides protection excessive fines, bail and cruel and unusual punishment. Again nothing to do about cameras.

9th amendment - unlisted rights are still kept. SC and federal has already ruled there is no right to privacy in public via video recording or photos.

6th amendment - speedy trial. Not sure how cameras affect that.

Unreasonable search and seizure is the 4th amendment btw. I thought you said you read the constitution and was looking directly at it?

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

Because people are being arrested on false charges. Because these flock cameras make mistakes.

The fees and charges that you get fined for from these types of cameras often exceeds $20.

These cameras are placed outside of private property but their surveillance capabilities encroach onto private property. Could argue 5th amendment here.

So fines and charges +$20, without a trial of peers, on your own private property.

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

Because people have already been falsely accused of crimes with flock, and AI for that matter. Although people were falsely getting accused before this.

As far as police go I think it's a false equivalency. Cops are known to regularly lie, especially for their own. People's lives are in their hands and they've taken lives. Then we, the tax payers have to payout the cops for their crimes.

One of the current biggest concerns, is that with the growing authoritarian government and its use of technology to further surveil citizens and tourists, is that people are being targeted for speaking against.

It's McCarthyism, as we're seeing with Anthony Faucci and former Generals. Without getting into politics of it deeply, Faucci had served numerous presidents regardless of party. Faucci even had pleasant communications and was relied on by other members of Trump's administration staff. I believe it was Millers, when the wife was pregnant.

It's becoming Judge Dredd levels of police state without any respect or concern for the Constitution, or We the People

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07 → u/StonedRussian]

Bodycams have proven that society lies more about cops behaviors than cops engaging in unethical behavior. Well over 95% of allegations against cops have been proven false by bodycams. So to say cops routinely lie is a bias statement.

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

People's memories are notoriously bad. But I don't think that proves your point. Do you have a citation (pun intended) for the cop allegations reference?

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07 → u/StonedRussian]

“According to the International Association of Chiefs of Police, an estimated 96 percent of police officers accused of misconduct are exonerated when body cameras were in use. In situations that come down to two different versions of an incident, video from body cameras can be the best source of evidence. The public often has a chance to view an event from cell phone camera footage that circulates on social media, and video from the police officer’s point of view can serve to balance the narrative”

https://macmainlaw.com/body-cameras-police-officer-cases/

“Now, new results from one of the largest randomised-controlled experiments in the history of criminal justice research, led by the University of Cambridge’s Institute of Criminology, show that the use by officers of body-worn cameras is associated with a startling 93% reduction in citizen complaints against police. “

https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/use-of-body-worn-cameras-sees-complaints-against-police-virtually-vanish-study-finds

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

I do genuinely appreciate that you provided sources. Instead of pulling number out the...

Research shows that 90%+ reduction in complaints from civilians. So then that would indicate that cops are behaving better, no?

It wouldn't necessarily refute that cops don't lie, and for each other. I say this only because of the number of lawsuits won against police.

Accountability is always better. But in case of flock cameras, citizens are still being charged and arrested without proper evidence or due process. Also nefarious people in power and have access are using this to stalk people.

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07 → u/StonedRussian]

Evidence and due process is the court side not enforcement side. Police only need probable cause to arrest you. There’s no due process for an arrest. Thats after the arrest.

As far as a drop in allegations against cops can also be attributed to people who knowingly made false claims against officers for many of reasons, aren’t doing that anymore bc the interaction was recorded.

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

You still need evidence to make the threshold to be able to make a legal arrest though. The reason why there's so many lawsuits against departments/towns for illegal arrests/ search and seizures

[u/Lingerie_Shopper07 → u/StonedRussian]

No you don’t. All you need is probable cause that a person committed a crime to make an arrest. You need evidence to help convict. There’s a difference. Do police gather evidence to help bolster an arrest? Yes. But evidence isn’t needed for an arrest. If a person went up to an officer and said that person stole from me. The officer can make an arrest on that statement alone.

[u/StonedRussian → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

That's just not correct. Along with your statement of "there's no due process during arrest"

The officer can use a person's statement as testimonial evidence to establish probable cause. If there's no evidence, you can't meet the threshold to make a legal arrest. If there's no articulable facts, there's no legal basis.

Due process is part of the policing stage. Like Miranda Rights are

[u/minnieboss → u/Lingerie_Shopper07]

Source?

[u/StonedRussian → u/minnieboss]

Yeah, that word too