(A.K.A. Non-Original Rants)

–Co-opting good stuff from all over the ‘Net and maybe some original thoughts—ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Flock is like Jarts for Law Enforcement

I’m assuming that most of y’all remember Jarts. If you don’t, then look them up.

To get straight to the point of the comparison, Jarts were a lot of fun until people started getting stupid and throwing them at other peoples’ heads. And then they got taken off the shelves. And so it is, and should be, with Flock cameras and law enforcement.

They can’t use the tools they have properly and they start doing the law enforcement equivalent of throwing a two foot dart at someone else. Usually their spouses, exes, or anyone upon whom they want to keep tabs.

From improper use, to just plain stupidity, the boys and girls in blue are proving that they cannot be trusted with the information that anyone with a badge can access. That’s the problem with warrantless searches or the collection of broad swathes of information on people who have done nothing but go about their lives.

The Supreme Court ruled that cell phone tower dumps (aka geofencing warrant) that collects data anyone who has been in the vicinity of a specific tower in order to track down a single person is an unconstitutional violation of privacy.

It would be nice to have the same logic applied to the Flock system. It needs to go the way of Jarts.

ETA: Expect a lot of ‘news/propaganda’ from state and local gendarmes regarding the usefulness of the cameras. One already crossed my feed about how they found a guy with dementia who had driven off across state lines. They know that their toy is about to be taken away from them.



16 responses to “Flock is like Jarts for Law Enforcement”

  1. I suspect my unenthusiastic response when asked about “traffic surveillance cameras” was one of the main reasons I was excused from jury duty a few months ago.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Seriously… When was the CCP hired to “monitor” the U.S. Citizenry? There’s been a lot of vocal and physical pushback on these cameras, as there should be.

    We are NOT Communist China.

    Yet….

    Jpe, thanks for the Jury Duty Avoidance Strategy.

    Like

  3. Any “tool” that is developed for LE will be abused. It’s the nature of ALL LE agencies. This is especially true of federal and state agencies who think they’re the arbiters of what the law says.

    The fact that the Supreme Court has ruled against specific uses is of no consequence to them. They’ll continue to abuse it and cover it up by developing alternate supporting procedures. Just look at all of the malfeasance committed by the Eff Bee Eye in its pursuit of President Trump over the last ten years.

    The biggest problem is that when cops at any level defy an SJC ruling, they’re given a slap on the wrist and pat on the ass with a wink and a nod, when in reality they should be fired and lose their pension.

    Nothing will change until THAT management behavior changes.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. Just left the Piedmont Hospital in Augusta, GA. and noticed Flock Cameras at entrance and exit?

    How is tracking a persons visit to a hospital Police related?

    Like

  5. Want the arguments against them?

    Propose they be installed in all Congressional chambers and offices, all police stations, school rooms, all courts and government offices.

    They’ll give you all the legal reasons against them.

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Point #2

    Your data is held by a private company. No oversite on who gets the data. No outside audits of QA/QC processes of Flock.

    I would assume less than .1% of the data collected is used to solve a crime or find a lost senior. So, what about the other 99,9%?

    Like

  7. It’s all incremental steps. No one really cares about the endless stream of license plate readers flock cameras Until it’s matched with facial recognition and the abuse starts. Police employ drones, no big deal. Until they get very large and have the ability to drop ARMED Boston Dynamics robot dogs. Eventually, we’ll be living in society of the sci-fi movie “Code 8” where large drones drop armed android police to aid in arrests. I’ll put money on it, all for that BS excuse of officer safety.

    Like

  8. Want to read another technology development that’ll make your hair stand on end? Read this:

    https://arstechnica.com/security/2026/08/new-surveillance-tech-links-your-phone-to-your-license-plate/

    Like

  9. Liberty or promises of security…. The capacity for abuse and destruction of privacy seems to far outweigh any good that could come of any such system. When citizens are “behaving ” themselves- government may have to invent new offenses to pay for more toys. We willingly carry tracking devices around with us everywhere, and many willingly have “alexa” listening devices and ring cameras in their homes that they bought with their own twice-taxed money. Modern mentality doesn’t lean toward privacy much. Just wait until they introduce digital currency- then government will know where every penny you get and spend goes. It blows me away when imbeciles vote in new taxes for themselves when it’s on the ballot. Talk about Masochism!

    Like

  10. I just came across some info that relates these camera’s can be permanently disabled by a hand held laser pointer. Don’t know if that’s true or not, but it comes from a usually reliable source.

    Like

  11. 20 years ago, i worked in Norcross. GSP used to park a photo-van on the intersection of JCB and PIB every morning. It made delivering to some clients a PIA because I had to take the frontage road all the way to 285 and come back up the other side…
    Of course, sometimes its fun to go through a police checkpoint, especially when you can do it 6 times in 30 minutes… same job, different delivery customer…

    Like

  12. As long as ‘they’ have access and we have no oversight, they love it. Change that and the whole equation changes.

    Like

  13. Carl Bussjaeger Avatar
    Carl Bussjaeger

    Not really related, but the Jarts reference reminded me that back in the ’80s, we called the F-16 “lawn dart.” I don’t know if it’s still in usage.

    Amazing how often those went down nose first.

    Like

  14. Steve T. There are a couple of reasons. 1) they have really good drugs in hospitals, the kind you can’t buy on the streets of Atlanta. 2) the police want to know exactly who comes to pick up the gangbangers that get shot.

    Like

  15. Spleakin of Jarts. Did anyone else decide that Jarts weren’t dangerous enough and get out the hunting bow and arrows, and shoot them straight up into the sky?

    Like

  16. Here’s an article about a guy who’s working on patterns to cover objects to avoid detection by the algorithm that analyzes the camera’s output feed. Via CFP: https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/09/this-adversarial-pattern-can-prevent-surveillance-cameras-from-detecting-you/

    This doesn’t look very practical at right now IMHO, but at least someone is working on anti-detection.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *