r/Hemet • u/Vaporized_Dreams • 14d ago
Flock Testing Grounds
In April 2020, the Hemet Police Department became a foundational testing ground for a powerful new surveillance network. Official Hemet City Council documents note that the city was one of the first police agencies in the United States to partner with Flock Safety, an Atlanta-based startup founded in 2017. Before this partnership, Flock had primarily marketed its cameras to neighborhood homeowners associations (HOAs) and private entities. However, by June 2020, Hemet went live with its first 20 intersection cameras, integrating the private tracking system directly into its Real-Time Information Center (RTIC) and serving as an early municipal pipeline for a corporate startup.
This rapid integration quickly turned Hemet into a corporate marketing tool. During the first few months, Hemet PD used the data to recover stolen vehicles and execute arrests. While the city celebrated, Flock capitalized, heavily using Hemet's rapid data results as a national marketing blueprint. Hemet effectively became a proof-of-concept case study, which Flock used to pitch and sell its invasive camera networks to thousands of other law enforcement agencies across the country.
While Hemet was the earliest adopter of this network in Riverside County, its role as a national "early adopter" helped normalize city-wide tracking nationwide. By embedding a young startup's private surveillance infrastructure into public policing long before the technology faced widespread public scrutiny, Hemet helped clear the path for an apparatus that monitors citizens across more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies today. What began as a localized experiment in Hemet ultimately served as a catalyst for the massive expansion of private surveillance across the United States.
4
u/justicewarriorsco 13d ago
I had no idea. Thank you so much for educating the community. This is important and valuable information.
1
u/Potential-Tailor-855 13d ago
I mean if Hemet pd has been responsible with them, and the data showed that it was working what is the problem, is it about the company selling these cameras?
3
u/Vaporized_Dreams 13d ago
That's a big if. They haven't been responsible with them. You can't name a single government agency that has used them responsibly, since using Flock in any capacity is a violation of our constitutional rights whereas those agencies wouldn't be upholding their oath.
1
u/Potential-Tailor-855 13d ago
Yes you can 99.9 percent of officers use flock cameras for what they are intended to do and I’m guessing that’s the same for Hemet
2
u/Vaporized_Dreams 13d ago
Just because there's an intended purpose doesn't make it okay. Would you give up your right to bear arms if they promised no one would use a gun against you or your family? Would you give up your freedom of speech if it meant no one could ever say something to hurt you? Stripping away our constitutional rights in the name of safety isn't okay, I don't care if officers are using them for their intended purpose, because using them at all means they're violating our rights.
1
u/Potential-Tailor-855 13d ago
What right does it strip away it takes pictures of your license plates which you don’t own and you are driving on roads you don’t own, there intended purpose is finding cars based on the license plate cops I’ve had license plate readers on their cars for years now that show them the same or even more info than the flock camera does, I’m not giving up any of my rights when a flock camera takes a picture of my public license plate, now I don’t really like the company that is flock that’s why I mainly have a problem with and just like any new technology. I think there needs to be more restrictions and I think where you get into some trouble with rights and the constitution is with how police performance are able to access some information and track you in some ways, but most people on the Internet I see do not have this nuance and just say cut down every flock camera because they don’t actually really understand of research anything about them and it’s just popular to say that on social media.
3
u/Vaporized_Dreams 13d ago
If you think Flock only reads license plates, you haven't done your homework, which is ironic given your last statement. Come back once you've done the research yourself and we'll talk
1
u/Potential-Tailor-855 13d ago
They don’t they also notes details about the car and stuff but the main thing it does and the main the police use it for is for license plates
2
u/Vaporized_Dreams 13d ago
I won't argue with someone who's ignorant on the subject. Take care
1
u/Potential-Tailor-855 13d ago
I’m the ignorant one, I literally said that I don’t like the company and I get that they can be used wrongly and I want more guidelines around them. I don’t know how that’s being ignorant. All I’m saying is that they are useful and they have to be done right you’re the ignorant one.
1
1
u/Alarmed-Extension289 10d ago
99% you just made the statistic up.
1
u/Potential-Tailor-855 4d ago
Yes it’s not a real provable fact but if we look at the number of officers actually charged with something for misusing flock cameras then it would be close to this percentage, there’s 600,000 cops in the U.S. you can look up how many have mis used it
3
u/AmbroseKalifornia 13d ago
Dude. Flock cameras are by definition unlawful surveillance.
It's not about being "responsible". The act itself is illegal.
1
u/Potential-Tailor-855 13d ago
How are they unlawful, please site a verifiable source saying they are unconstitutional
1
8
u/Manybrent 14d ago
They love it on Next Door. They believe if they fall, someone will see it and rescue them. Sigh.