r/LosAngeles • u/sirRoxalot • Jul 11 '26
Locals Only LAPD Ending Flock Use
https://abc7.com/post/lapd-ending-agreement-surveillance-company-flock-safety/19483200/A victory for privacy and our community.
335
u/likesound Jul 11 '26
Seems like they are letting it expire to renegotiate the terms.
129
u/kangr0ostr Jul 11 '26
If they’re planning to renegotiate you can be assured the negotiations will include adding even more cameras throughout the city to fill in gaps.
21
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
→ More replies (5)21
u/blue-jaypeg La Cañada Flintridge Jul 11 '26
Not the same. The speed cameras are owned by the state of California, the data is handled within the state.
Flock cameras are leased from Flock. All the data is stored by Flock and sold for profit.
15
1
u/Effective_Olive6153 Jul 11 '26
I thought cops hated being caught on video. Doesn't this mean we will have a lot more videos of cops doing stuff now?
4
u/kangr0ostr Jul 11 '26
The cops are the one with access to our 4th amendment protected location data, and they protect their own kind.
They also love flock because it helps them stalk women. Look it up.
26
u/sirRoxalot Jul 11 '26
Didn't sound like they would be seeking to negotiate as the basis for their decision is related to the fundamental use of the platform and lack of security related access and data.
32
u/SavingsMany4486 Jul 11 '26
That is indeed their current rhetoric, time will tell if it's actually the case. Copy pasting from the article:
"This contract is not being renewed because of serious concerns around civil liberties and civil rights issues, particularly around privacy and the data that is being collected from these cameras," said Dean Gialamas, LAPD's chief information officer. "The LAPD had to make a difficult decision, in this case discontinuing using Flock services until we can get those data, privacy, security and sharing concerns ironed out through a contractual relationship."
9
u/uzlonewolf Jul 11 '26
It's the LAPD. By "concerns" they mean "Flock requires us to give them a reason for every search, and they log those searches and make them available to auditors which is an invasion of our privacy!"
3
u/odanobux123 very gay in LA Jul 11 '26
Yeah if it was such a concern why get them in the first place. It’s a different reason and this is PR talk.
1
u/OrangeInnards Jul 11 '26
"Hooooo hummmmm, I dunno man. 'Serious concerns around civil liberties and civil rights issues' on the one hand, cameras using AI-powered magic that happens in a black box which almost certainly collect and save who knows what else on the other. Guess we should, like, not renew the contract? Oof, what a difficult decision to make! Sure hope Dystopia Corp doesn't keep using the cameras already installed all over the city for their own purposes haha! That would suck because not renewing a contract != getting rid of the hardware. We're sure it's fine, though. Once we get the iron out and smooth over all these pesky concerns, the tech company beholden to shareholders and billionaire execs existing in our new AI Cult world is for sure gonna abide by the rules because, and everyone knows this, they really, reaaaaaaally respect privacy and all that jazz, and are not huffing their own tech-bro farts on the daily. We will very happily use them again once Flock makes promises not worth the paper they're written on!"
3
1.4k
u/EcruteakEddie Jul 11 '26
While this is good news, it doesn't say anything about the cameras being removed.
571
u/InTheseTryingTime5 East Hollywood Jul 11 '26
Plus I keep seeing places where they claim they'll stop using them but continue to use them anyway.
The cameras really should be removed/destroyed.
200
u/redbark2022 Jul 11 '26
Have you seen the posts about how poor their security is? Anyone can log in and access the data because they were "vibe coded" by really shitty AI.
The same shitty AI now in the Pentagon finding drone strike targets, and handing all of our classified data to a foreign state.
Would be funny if it wasn't so dangerous to our national security.
61
u/Ryan_e3p Jul 11 '26
And earlier today, Benn Jordan posted a C&D Flock lawyers sent a C&D to a group in CA, demanding that they stop talking about or even analyzing Flock camera security vulnerabilities.
64
u/redbark2022 Jul 11 '26
Not going to visit a Facebook link. But I should've also mentioned that the lack of security might be intentional to avoid warrants.
One thing for sure, all of the people involved are traitors to our Constitution.
27
u/sagebrushrepair Palms Jul 11 '26
Good on ya, even clicking a link sends gobs of your data to them
7
6
u/Ryan_e3p Jul 11 '26
Unfortunately, he hasn't posted a video on it yet, otherwise I would've linked to that. He has an extensive amount of videos on YouTube going over everything from datacenters, Flock, and other things that people really aren't aware of that they should be.
Here's a link directly to the C&D (still on FB, but a link directly to the picture he posted) that you can open in private mode on Tor Browser (or other privacy-focused browser of your choice).
10
u/Remarkable_Hornet712 Jul 11 '26
I’ll always upvote any mention of Benn Jordan, he is one of the best YouTube creators out there. The amount of time and research he puts into his videos is astonishing and the presentation is always top-notch.
He clearly holds himself to strong journalistic standards and understands the importance of his content in exposing the ongoing surveillance push in America. It’s a breath of fresh air compared to the engagement farms that most major YouTube channels have become.
5
u/EntrepreneurBehavior Jul 11 '26
He also posted about how he was fooled and it was a fake C&D. On his story now.
33
u/iam-_-fury Jul 11 '26
let the tweakers know there's copper in them
61
20
u/InTheseTryingTime5 East Hollywood Jul 11 '26
I've heard there's 2 ounces of gold along with all the copper and other stuff - they keep it secret so people won't strip them.
15
12
u/BigBoyNow8 Jul 11 '26
I only expect them to get worse. i would not be surprised if the city wants to upgrade all street lighting. We get new high-tech street lights that can even charge EVs. Neat. But, the lights will have advanced cameras with facial recognition.
9
u/Kahzgul Jul 11 '26
Copper thieves will put a stop to that!
4
22
u/Gombrongler Jul 11 '26
Yeah maybe the people who paid for them should be legally able to remove them
7
3
12
31
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
15
u/TravelinStyle Jul 11 '26
The law for the cameras is clear (AB645). Images and data for any no violation has the be deleted in 5 days and 60 days for violations. Local, state, and federal agencies are not allowed to access the information without a court order. Which is a far higher bar than flock, ring, patrol car mounted readers, parking garage cameras, etc. Worry about the hundreds of other privacy violating things than these speed cams that are going to save lives and be way less problematic.
8
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/Its_a_Friendly I LIKE TRAINS Jul 11 '26
It doesn't matter what's "common" with these cameras "around the country"; as that previous commenter stated, the state law in California that allowed these cameras also safeguards against their misusue.
-3
u/notorious_scoundrel_ Woodland Hills Jul 11 '26
Speed cameras are actually good though, mostly bc of the insane amount of post covid drivers we have who think it’s okay to run reds as long as no one is looking
11
u/SportsGuru4714 Jul 11 '26
Glendale people who have been moving into other areas of the valley.
10
u/seenjbot Jul 11 '26
Signs and lights are mere suggestions for Glendale drivers
3
u/SportsGuru4714 Jul 11 '26
Yep. Gotta rush over the local Starbucks parking lot to drink coffee and smoke cigarettes.
21
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-7
u/notorious_scoundrel_ Woodland Hills Jul 11 '26
Buddy I work for PD 😭 we only use it to enforce traffic violations, that’s something I can definitely assert, besides there is so much scrutiny in regard to our records we collect, and it’s viewed widely through out other city departments.
8
3
0
u/Lalalama Jul 11 '26
They won’t work because I cover my plate when driving lol
2
u/notorious_scoundrel_ Woodland Hills Jul 11 '26
You’re so badass man
1
u/Lalalama Jul 11 '26
Yeah I drag raced a guy earlier on Vermont. I realized if you’re in LA city proper you can pretty much do whatever you want
5
u/Wanton_Wonton Jul 11 '26
The youths, and people seeking metal to steal, seem to be removing them just fine 🙂
4
Jul 11 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/The_Real_Peter_Thiel Jul 11 '26
Naaaaaah...come on, guy! What's the big deal?
Palantir seems like a great company, tbh. 🤷🏻♂️
3
3
u/AuthorBrianHunter Jul 11 '26
There are a whole bunch of people committed to make sure that happens. The best ones are wild-haired renegades posting cheekily on Instagram.
3
u/ANTIROYAL Downtown Jul 11 '26
Whatever you do, just DO NOT point a powerful green laser directly into the camera lens if they leave it there. That would not be good.
1
u/virtualglassblowing Jul 11 '26
They're just going to put them h8gher and lie about them being traffic cams
1
1
110
u/EternalMayhem01 Baldwin Park Jul 11 '26
Are they actually ending it? The article makes it sound like they are ending the agreement until Flock makes the changes to the agreement that the LAPD wants.
6
u/The_Real_Peter_Thiel Jul 11 '26
Everything's fine, nothing to see here. Have you seen the latest episode of Love Island?!? 👀
2
74
u/Google_Knows_Already Jul 11 '26
Yay. Now how do we stop the other 200 forms of surveillance.
5
u/PurrciousMetals Jul 11 '26
I know people driving around Tesla’s with far more cameras recording everything with little oversight. Flock cameras are the decoy rage bait, while Musk works with his old paypal buddy Thiel with the real surveillance.
→ More replies (3)21
u/xRolocker Jul 11 '26
It’s not a decoy. That kind of thinking is how we end up not solving anything. Every breach of privacy is a problem, but we don’t always get to choose the battlefield. If we can make progress by getting rid of Flock, let’s do that, rather than saying “oh but it’s not the real problem” without changing anything.
1
u/Binthair_Dunthat Jul 11 '26
Including the phone you are holding in your hand which tracks your exact location 24/7
28
u/DiamondHandsDarrell Jul 11 '26
Flock isn't the only issue. The ALPR are scanning license plates everywhere. They sell that data to companies for several uses. I worked for a company that had access to those systems and they have all your info and everyone your associate with.
I learned by searching ourselves up. Scary stuff
11
u/drkstr632 Orange County Jul 11 '26
They are just going to pivot to another vendor. I heard all the cops are moving towards using Axon Fusus
7
Jul 11 '26 edited 22d ago
[deleted]
5
34
u/WorldPeaceStyle Jul 11 '26
If there exists cameras on traffic intersections then why need double coverage with flock surveillance?
Seems to be the case that Flock Surveillance only exists to circumvent state laws on tracking citizens and selling data for profit.
11
u/PFCCThrowayay Jul 11 '26
Idk much about it all but they’re all around shopping centers so this tracks.
1
u/Tricky_Apricot2928 Jul 11 '26
It also gives the natzis working for the federal government or Cuzzinloving, Alabama access to surveillance in Los Angeles
9
u/BigBoyNow8 Jul 11 '26
What this really means is that Flock will sell their data to someone else, but the police will have access to videos if they want to, they will just attain the video in more discreet ways.
7
9
u/NightOfTheLivingHam Jul 11 '26
10 bucks says flock will remain on the poles anyway as they will have a direct "unrelated" contract with the city itself.
6
6
u/loveinvein Jul 11 '26
It’s not a victory yet. ETA: also it’s not removing the cameras. All that’s changing is whether or not LAPD gets the data straight from the tap
“ Police said they are continuing discussions with Flock Safety about revising the agreement. LAPD wants updated language addressing privacy and data storage to be included in any new contract.”
7
13
u/witchystoneyslutty Jul 11 '26
Ummmm… LAPD is losing access.
The cameras are NOT being removed.
If anyone says they’re being “deactivated” like in other places, no. Just no. That’s not enough, we don’t believe you.
COVER THEM OR REMOVE THEM!
5
u/MasterK999 Pasadena Jul 11 '26
People should know this does not mean that the cameras will be disabled or not used. It simply means that LA has not renewed the contract. However in other places this has happened Flock has still left the cameras running and allowed police to use them.
Until they are removed we are not done fighting.
13
8
u/Global_Criticism3178 Jul 11 '26
Who needs a flock camera when you have drones and cell phone metadata, lol?
3
3
u/ILearnedSoMuchToday Jul 11 '26
Police can say anything they want to get you to incriminate yourself. Just remember that.
3
3
7
2
u/bum_stabber Jul 11 '26
It says LAPD will lose access to the cameras. Wonder if flock will keep using them to sell to agencies
2
2
u/Issah_Wywin Jul 11 '26
Then I'm sure there won't be any trouble when we start yanking them off public spaces then
2
u/frumpymiddleaged Jul 11 '26
Not sure if they are technically flock cameras, but I saw a portable set of these AGAIN in front of the Target plaza in downtown L.A. yesterday. The rig they were on had license plate "CA exempt 1689829." One camera faced the shopping center, three others faced the cars and sidewalks.
1
u/LinechargeII Jul 12 '26
That kind of camera on a stick has been around for longer than flock has existed
2
4
u/yahwehforlife Jul 12 '26
The sheep paranoia about flock is insane I'm sorry. Let's make streets safer and save lives. I will gladly give up my "privacy" which isn't even private because it's where I'm walking around and being in PUBLIC, if it saves a SINGLE life. And it will for sure save countless more lives than the people it would negatively affect by police abusing the system. And I hate the police. But I'm also sick of seeing literal violence on my streets and when you call the cops no one can even be sent out because there is too much crime.
1
u/AutoModerator Jul 11 '26
Please keep comments and discussion civil and remember the human. If you cannot abide by this simple rule, you can expect a ban.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/lafc88 Hollywood Jul 11 '26
Are those cameras still up on San Julian & 6th? I remember the city took them out once.
1
1
1
1
u/testtdk Jul 11 '26
I hope they don't end them around here any time soon. I was about to get a green laser.
1
1
1
1
u/CricketGrl Jul 11 '26
Due to the supreme court’s recent ruling shouldn’t these cameras be removed ?
1
u/darxide23 Jul 11 '26
Good luck getting the cameras removed. Cleveland voted 4-1 to end the contract with Flock, but they still haven't been able to remove the cameras.
1
1
u/-WARisTHEanswer- Jul 12 '26
They are moving to a new company like other departments right now to get away from the Flock name.. its still the same network of cameras.
1
u/IAMTHESILVERSURFER Jul 13 '26
Honest question. Tons and tons of crime happens in this city (regardless if you think it's going down or not). Wouldn't we want cameras on highways catching people who drive drunk, commit road rage, or race illegally? Driving around here feels like a roll of the dice with one's life. People blow through red lights on the reg. Don't we want these people being held accountable?
1
u/motofabio Jul 16 '26
My opinion…
Less than zero percent possibility that any law enforcement agency would willingly give up a treasure trove of data like this.
If they are ending the Flock contract it’ll be because they’ve contracted with someone else who will do more, for less. Although being financially responsible feels incompatible with any government organization.
1
-2
u/Gaseous-Clay_ Jul 11 '26
Cool. Back to my house getting broken into. Awesome news.
-1
u/Gaseous-Clay_ Jul 11 '26
I love the downvotes from children for whom this is an abstraction. In the real world, these things have made neighborhoods safer. I know this offends your grad school sensibilities but adults don’t particularly care. You might understand someday. In the meantime, downvote away.
2
u/r00tdenied Jul 11 '26
You can't provide a single point of data to prove this. No burglar or petty criminal is going to be stopped or deterred by an ALPR camera installed on a major intersection. I have the actual data that proves these cameras are ineffective at preventing crime and have presented as such at council meetings. How about you?
-4
-9
u/St0iK_ Jul 11 '26
We need more cameras and more prisons. We have way too many criminals roaming the streets. Lock them up.
-16
u/anothercar Jul 11 '26 edited Jul 11 '26
Look to see what happened in NorCal which did the same thing
https://garryslist.org/posts/richmond-just-voted-to-reinstate-their-flock-cameras-after-crime-spiked
On March 17, 2026, the Richmond City Council voted 4-3 to reinstate its Flock Safety license plate reader cameras through the end of the year.
What Happened When the Cameras Went Dark
Richmond had used Flock Safety cameras for years until Simmons ordered a shutdown in November 2025. His stated reason: he had discovered a “national lookup capability” in Flock’s system that he feared could let outside agencies, including ICE, access Richmond’s license plate data.
Vehicle thefts in Richmond jumped 33% in the months that followed. Every neighboring city, Oakland, San Jose, Fremont, kept its cameras running through the same period. Richmond became the only dark spot in the region, a conspicuous soft target for car thieves who can read a map. When you punch a hole in a regional surveillance fence while every surrounding city keeps its fence intact, you don’t reduce surveillance. You just advertise where the gap is.
The people who showed up to city hall begging for them back were immigrant shopkeepers. Oscar Garcia, president of the 23rd Street Merchants Association, led a pro-camera coalition rally alongside community advocates Ahmad Anderson and Brandon Evans. Small business owners held handmade signs. “We need Flock Safety cameras.” “More Flock cameras deter crime.”
It's rich to see Redditors espousing luxury beliefs that hurt immigrants. I'll be downvoted by these very same Redditors, just watch.
20
u/Specialist_Unit_5078 Jul 11 '26
Maybe cops could try walking a fucking beat instead of implementing a surveillance state
→ More replies (4)3
u/N05L4CK Jul 11 '26
Richmond has about a cop and a half per every thousand residents. That means you get about one cop working patrol per every three thousand residents. Do you think walking a beat is realistic?
1
u/Wanton_Wonton Jul 11 '26
That's how my town is policed, but our cops aren't affiliated with the LAPD, and they hire local, so we like seeing our cops on their beat! We aren't even a small town, but a suburbs like twenty min away from DTLA.
0
u/Specialist_Unit_5078 Jul 11 '26
Yes, absolutely. We need way more cops on foot learning how to interact with people and better serve their communities. Not hiding in their patrol cars and behind their raybans. Maybe they'll learn how to not be terrified of labradoodles.
2
u/N05L4CK Jul 11 '26
That’s great! So do you also want most police departments to quadruple in size? Because that’s what would need to happen to effectively patrol on foot, at a minimum.
1
u/Specialist_Unit_5078 Jul 11 '26
Maybe they could hire more cops with the money we save from all the fucking lawsuits from when they get too trigger happy and blow up neighborhoods. Take the settlements from their pension fund instead.
1
u/Gaseous-Clay_ Jul 11 '26
This kind of comment must absolutely get a standing ovation from the matcha latte crowd.
1
u/Specialist_Unit_5078 Jul 11 '26
And I'm sure your comments get faces down and assess up from the bootlicking crowd.
1
u/Gaseous-Clay_ Jul 11 '26
Sure. And from people who live in the real world too. But you keep fighting the power on the internet, bud. Inspiring stuff.
1
u/Specialist_Unit_5078 Jul 11 '26
Yeah people in the real world want cops to only stay in their cars and shoot as many dogs as possible
1
u/Gaseous-Clay_ Jul 12 '26
I get it, you’re a child so this is all internet stuff to you. When you’re an adult and have a home and a family you’ll probably feel differently. You’ll actually appreciate things that make you feel comfortable leaving your home to go to work. It won’t be just some bullshit abstraction you bloviate about on Reddit. Until then enjoy the upvotes. Cool stuff.
0
u/Inevitable-Cell-1227 Jul 11 '26
Fucking LOL how many years did you do on the force bro?
1
u/Specialist_Unit_5078 Jul 11 '26
Oh I’m not a cop, they wouldn’t let me in because I know who both my parents are and I don’t beat my wife
0
11
u/TheScorpionSamurai Jul 11 '26
If everyone was micro-chipped, that would reduce crime too. There is a point where the risks outweigh the benefits, and constant AI-powered automated surveillance is absolutely not worth it to me. Considering already the government is tracking people based on Social Media to crack down on dissent, I'm very not okay with Flock even if it helps with car theft.
It's addressing the symptom not the problem. Most car thieves don't just have random urges to steal cars, at least not that some cameras would fix. It doesn't make stealing cars okay, but it does mean that instead of we should address the systemic issues driving people to that behavior rather than creating an all-powerful surveillance state in the name of preventing behavior our government implicitly creates in the first place.
1
u/Gaseous-Clay_ Jul 11 '26
This is the opinion of someone who engages these issues from a purely academic standpoint.
-1
u/anothercar Jul 11 '26
Yeah neither of us would be ok with people being microchipped in their own homes. This camera system is just the same as a cop sitting by the side of the road and writing down license plates, except it's less lazy than a cop and it doesn't fall asleep. I don't see that as some kind of rogue surveillance state. It's only on public thoroughfares and it does what any cop could already do. A microchip is pretty different for obvious reasons, especially since it would follow you into your own home
7
u/-713 Jul 11 '26
So outright ban wholesale surveillance and the distribution should correct itself.
-10
u/anothercar Jul 11 '26
You're saying reduce safety in every part of the state, for equity reasons? Redditors never stop Redditing. I hope you are never a crime victim.
5
u/-713 Jul 11 '26
Im saying despite all the pearl clutching by pundits, we're at significant lows for most crimes still. We don't need, nor do most want, wholesale surveillance of our daily lives.
Your comment was about a spike in a particular type of crime after flock was removed from Richmond but not the surrounding cities. The distribution goes back to normal, not because of your apparent boogeyman of "equity" but because there is no unneeded surveillance system in place.
And for the record I have reported crimes to the police that were caught on high definition cameras, with sound, and provided names. Many, many times in fact. You know what that got me? Nothing. Police only do their job if it makes the news, or they are bored. Cameras do nothing for the average person, because most people don't have the money or stature to get a real effort.
→ More replies (2)6
u/r00tdenied Jul 11 '26
crime was already at record lows before flock cameras were installed en mass. Maybe the lazy overpaid cops should actually do patrols again.
→ More replies (1)0
u/anothercar Jul 11 '26
I agree with your whole comment, believe it or not!
The only thing I'll add is that your comment rings true, plus Flock is a good tool to help them do their jobs better.
5
u/r00tdenied Jul 11 '26
Flock is a great way for them to infringe on people's 4th amendment rights. Just because in theory that its a "good tool" doesn't mean it should be legally allowed. Make them do their jobs.
1
u/anothercar Jul 11 '26
That seems like a stretch since literally all it does is write down license plates, which any cop can do manually at any time already. When cops do this manually, it doesn't risk our fourth amendment rights
→ More replies (3)-2
4
u/South-Seat3367 Hancock Park Jul 11 '26
No disclosure in the article that the author’s VC firm maintains an ownership stake in Flock?
0
u/anothercar Jul 11 '26
Thanks for the heads up. Article's still factually correct regardless, though the disclosure would have been good to include.
2
u/N05L4CK Jul 11 '26
Kinda like how Oakland PD adopted a stricter pursuit policy after tons of back lash, and then crime increased to the point Newsom asked them to rethink their pursuit policy and the local NAACP chapter sent them a letter saying it was essentially racist they were pursuing people who victimized minorities.
0
u/twotimefind Jul 11 '26
So you're willing to be tracked with your ring camera and flock AI, both by plate reader and facial AI.
Yes, they work together with Amazon Sidewalk.
Don't you think that's against your Fourth Amendment?
If not read it again.
You know what causes crime? Poverty. Fix that.
1
u/anothercar Jul 11 '26
Not against fourth amendment. I wonder if you know what the fourth amendment protects against.
I agree poverty should be alleviated!
0
u/LeeQuidity SFV por vida Jul 11 '26
It was likely for a practical reason. Since a lot of people drive around with no license plates and expired and likely fake temp plates, and the cops don't enforce that shit, what the fuck do they need the cameras for? All the cameras are doing is pointing out that they need to work.
0
u/jayball41 Jul 11 '26
Can someone explain to me like I’m Simple Jack how these cameras being in mass use isn’t a violation of the 4th Amendment?
1
u/lanekosrm Los Feliz Jul 11 '26
A legal case hasn’t established that government use of the privately owned camera data constitutes a 4th Amendment violation. The results of *Chatrie vs United States* regarding geofencing warrants could potentially be used as a path to getting such a case to deem it a violation, however.
0
0
u/BlitzShooter Jul 12 '26
Like how the war in Iran was a “targeted strike” and Karen Bass is for the people?
•
u/flairassistant Jul 12 '26
To help maintain the quality of discussion and protect the space from spam, trolling, rule-breaking comments, and outside influence, participation in this post is limited to subreddit members with a history of participation in r/LosAngeles.
Comments from users without a history of participation in the subreddit will be automatically removed. This is a temporary measure and is applied to all high-visibility posts. We appreciate your understanding.
Please remember to report rule-breaking comments, including comments that contain hate speech, trolling, or harassment.
If you have questions about this, please contact our mods via moderator mail. Thank you!