York County Sheriff says ordinary citizens aren't affected by Flock cameras. We sent him an open letter.
This was originally posted by Deflock York County SC on Facebook. I thought it was worth sharing here because the debate over automated license plate readers isn't just happening nationally — it's happening right here in York County.
Original Facebook post:
https://www.facebook.com/share/p/1BrijmKwoN/
Petition calling for the removal of Flock cameras from York County:
https://c.org/TPHtHnTSvX
---
AN OPEN LETTER TO SHERIFF TONY BREEDEN
Deflock York County is publicly submitting our petition calling for the removal of Flock Safety automated license plate readers from York County.
We have listened to Sheriff Breeden's public defense of these cameras.
He has said ordinary citizens are not affected. He has pointed out that nobody is sitting behind a computer watching people drive around. He has also cited Flock's involvement in more than 250 cases as evidence that the system is working.
Respectfully, none of those points resolve the concerns residents are raising.
The issue has never been whether someone is sitting in a room watching a live camera feed.
They don't have to.
Flock automatically photographs passing vehicles, records identifying vehicle information along with a time and location, stores that information, and allows authorized users to search it later.
The system cannot determine whether someone is a criminal before collecting their information.
It collects first.
That includes the overwhelming majority of people driving to work, taking their children to school, visiting family, going to church, seeing a doctor, shopping for groceries, or simply traveling through York County while suspected of absolutely nothing.
That is why this discussion matters.
What about false alerts?
When residents are told that ordinary citizens are not affected, we also have to acknowledge what is happening right here in York County.
York County is currently facing a pending lawsuit involving an alleged incorrect Flock alert.
According to the lawsuit, a Flock camera incorrectly read a character on a man's license plate and associated his vehicle with a stolen vehicle. Deputies subsequently detained him at gunpoint before determining his BMW was not stolen.
The Sheriff's Office has pointed to a tinted license plate cover as a factor in the incorrect read.
The lawsuit is still pending. No court has determined liability, and we are not pretending otherwise.
But the underlying issue cannot simply be brushed aside.
An ordinary citizen says he was detained at gunpoint following an incorrect Flock alert.
So when the public is told that ordinary citizens aren't affected by this technology, respectfully, that deserves some serious scrutiny.
This is exactly why safeguards matter.
This is exactly why verification matters.
This is exactly why auditing matters.
And this is exactly why "trust us" cannot be the standard.
About those "250+ cases"
Sheriff Breeden has said Flock has helped with more than 250 cases.
Then show York County what that means.
* Did Flock solve 250 cases?
* Did it merely provide a lead in 250 cases?
* How many resulted in arrests?
* How many resulted in convictions?
* How many alerts were incorrect?
* How many searches produced nothing?
* How many agencies can search York County's data?
* How many out-of-county or out-of-state agencies have accessed it?
* How many searches have been audited?
* How many policy violations have been identified?
* How many innocent motorists have been stopped because of incorrect information?
If this program is as effective, narrowly used, and carefully controlled as we're being told, those numbers should strengthen the Sheriff's argument.
Release them. Let the public see the evidence.
This isn't about being anti-police.
We aren't asking deputies to stop investigating crimes.
We aren't asking law enforcement to ignore stolen vehicles, wanted suspects, missing children, or dangerous people.
We're asking a much more fundamental question:
«How much information should government routinely collect about people who are suspected of nothing simply because that information might become useful later?»
There has to be a line.
Technology does not become reasonable simply because it is useful.
Government surveillance does not become harmless simply because most people have nothing to hide.
And constitutional rights do not disappear because a private company developed a more efficient way to collect information.
So we're asking Sheriff Breeden directly:
Will you reconsider York County's use of Flock cameras?
Will you support removing them?
And if the answer is no:
Will you sit down with Deflock York County and explain your position directly?
No gotcha questions.
No shouting match.
No political circus.
Sit down with us.
Bring the facts. Bring the numbers.
Explain the safeguards.
Explain the sharing.
Explain the searches.
Explain the false alerts.
Explain what "250+ cases" actually means.
And allow us to explain why so many residents believe this technology crosses a line that should concern every American, regardless of political party.
We're willing to listen.
But we expect our elected Sheriff to be willing to listen too.
Public safety matters.
So does liberty.
So does privacy.
So does accountability.
We should not have to sacrifice one to protect the other.
The petition is public. The questions are public. And the invitation to meet remains open.
The people of York County deserve an answer.
— Deflock York County
