observant1
Getting comfortable
Maybe they shouldn't go with the mandated DEI company and or cheapest bid. If I had taxpayer money I'd buy ANPR's that are designed to capture plates at night in pouring down rain.
Flock installed LPR's without permits and has now been banned from operating in two states
- Thread starter jd415
- Start date
I just got done watching this. It's worth the 30 minutes.
observant1
Getting comfortable
Evanston is costlier than living in the city of Chicago. The cost of living in Evanston, which averages $2124 for an individual and $5382 for a family of 4, ranks in the top 4 percent of the most expensive cities in the world.Oct 20, 2022
The issue is they went with printed plates that are not as reflective and used a blue that infrared doesn't see.
I can get the old stamped plates fine in a pouring down rain LOL. It's these new flat ones that suck.
This just in...
In CA, their biggest gripe against Flock is they feel it's being used by ICE.....what a surprise.
</end sarcasm>.
lookout.co
In CA, their biggest gripe against Flock is they feel it's being used by ICE.....what a surprise.
</end sarcasm>.
Movement against police use of Flock Safety cameras gains momentum in Santa Cruz County
As Watsonville weighs renewing its Flock Safety camera contract, a new coalition is urging local cities to cut ties with the surveillance vendor, citing immigration risks and civil liberties concerns.
lookout.co
StevenFromTexas
Getting comfortable
- Nov 25, 2016
- 857
- 2,336
Flock uses cameras with 850nm IR illumination, because that makes the optics dirt cheap (lots of suppliers). But more and more states are switching to the 3M printed license plates, which enables them to sells hundred of vanity plate variants to residents. Those plates have terrible 850nm reflectivity - most of the ink colors reflect almost equally, so you get no contrast.
The terrible performance of Flock Safety cameras at night is no secret to law enforcement. So why do they keep selling so many cameras? As one local cop explained to me, because Flock Safety has the most comprehensive multi-state LPR database of any vendor. Flock got started early in the LPR race, built out their cameras all around the country, and now no other vendor can touch them. If you're a cop doing an investigation, the Flock database allows you to track a suspect's vehicle all over your state and in surrounding states as well.
There are several LPR vendors who now offer cameras with 720 nm IR illumination that can read 3M plates, but none of them provide the type of database that Flock does. That is really Flock's big selling point. Until Flock Safety gets better competition, they have little incentive to improve their cameras.
Cities Are Fighting Back Against The Law-Breaking Flock License Plate Cameras
Amid growing public debate over the role of surveillance tech in law enforcement, Flock issues have become a flashpoint.
- Nov 25, 2016
- 857
- 2,336
Nice stirring article that of course completely misses two essential points:Cities Are Fighting Back Against The Law-Breaking Flock License Plate Cameras
Amid growing public debate over the role of surveillance tech in law enforcement, Flock issues have become a flashpoint.www.yahoo.com
(1) You could shut down Flock Safety tomorrow, and half a dozen companies would immediately move in to take their place. There's nothing magical about Flock's market position. They got there first, they expanded quickly, and they built out the biggest network. Multiple companies have better cameras, and could easily take Flock's place.
(2) There are a thousand better ways your location can be tracked than by LPRs. This is another "EVIL LPR CAMERAS" article that assumes that somehow these cameras are magically following us home.
Flock's biggest mistake is their failure to gauge public sentiment and adjust their message accordingly. Their CEO is a pure tech guy who knows how to sell the technology to the police, but not to the public.
Oh, boy....here we go.....
Amazon Ring security cameras moving deeper into law enforcement with Flock Safety, Axon deals
bigredfish
Known around here
In case you want to see where they are installed.
As 25 of my 31 years in traffic signal maintenance was for municipal government, I observed that the police have absolutely NO problem spending taxpayer money for the latest tech....gotta keep the budget up and spent so you will be allotted as much or more the following fiscal year.
I'm not suggesting or implying anything here, just stating facts: 
- This was 14 years ago (2011) in the UK.
- A gas-powered circular saw is noisy, expensive and takes quite a bit of time to cut through a metal pole.
- A decent paintball gun can place several balls on the camera lens quickly and quietly and provide the same results except not as long lasting.
Here's a related story. It might be hard to believe but Eugene, OR is even harder left than Portland.
Eugene won't release Flock camera locations. The ACLU is suing
deflock.me shows about 40 cameras there. Here's the articled intro:
Eugene won't release Flock camera locations. The ACLU is suing
deflock.me shows about 40 cameras there. Here's the articled intro:
- The ACLU of Oregon is suing the City of Eugene for not revealing the locations of its Flock surveillance cameras.
- The lawsuit stems from a denied public records request for the Automated License Plate Reader camera locations.
- Concerns over privacy and data sharing previously led Eugene to turn off the cameras on October 14.
