July 28, 2026
As if the current serious political divide in our country and the attempts of the radical left to turn America into Cuba or Venezuela aren’t enough for the country to deal with, we now are becoming aware of a movement among governments and law enforcement agencies to post surveillance and ALPR cameras around their areas.
And we know that there are some present in our area.
The public is told that these devices help protect citizens and help to identify law breakers. There are reportedly tens-of-thousands of AI (Artificial Intelligence) cameras mounted on utility poles and other support elements across the country.
Perhaps the most abundant type of these cameras is the ALPR (automated license plate reader). These enable law enforcement to identify vehicles whose drivers have broken laws or perhaps caused accidents.
That sounds like a good idea, and it can certainly help to identify people involved in law-breaking and other negative behavior. But there is a good bit more to the story.
As this relatively new activity spreads across the country, it is raising major privacy concerns, as these cameras operate in AI-powered networks that track and record public movement.
These cameras capture vehicle license plates and vehicle details like the make, model, and color. They also record timestamps, exact locations, and unique vehicle elements like bumper stickers or dents, all of which can aid law enforcement to identify those who have broken laws.
This data is saved in searchable cloud databases and retained for 30 days or longer. These databases provide authorities with a great deal of information for every vehicle and its owner/driver, and that includes both those who are involved in wrongdoing and everyone else, as well.
As you might imagine, this has sparked intense debate between public safety advocates and civil liberties groups who are concerned with citizen’s privacy rights. And, there is the concern regarding local surveillance data potentially feeding into wider federal immigration or law enforcement tracking networks.
And, it must be said that the problems with having all this information stored are two-fold: First, while those who have access to the information could misuse it, most will not. But that possibility exists, and it appears there is not adequate protection against that at this time.
Second: As Americans, we have a healthy list of inalienable rights that are guaranteed to be protected by our government. One of those is our privacy, although it is not phrased that way in the Bill of Rights.
Among the guarantees is in the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The Amendment does not use the word "privacy," but protects against unreasonable government searches and seizures. And privacy can be invaded by unreasonable searches. Legitimate searches require a warrant to be issued for probable cause.
Critics warn that the ease of cross-referencing and sharing data with other agencies across the country negates traditional Fourth Amendment privacy safeguards, putting our privacy at risk.
Civil rights groups, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), argue that logging the movements of everyday citizens who are not suspected of any crime is nothing more than un-American mass surveillance.
On its website (aclu.org), the ACLU, in its usual mode, said the following: “Automatic license plate reader (ALPR) companies like Flock Safety are quietly trying to build a nationwide mass surveillance system. If there are Flock cameras in your city, they are tracking, logging, and sharing your movements without a warrant. But we're not powerless. More and more communities are rejecting these creepy cameras — and yours can be one of them!”
At this point, that perspective is more a gross exaggeration than a true picture of what is happening. In other comments, the organization implies that this is an effort by the Trump administration to identify and locate its enemies, rather than the result of technological evolution.
However, the ACLU comment did note the displeasure among the people. The ALPR cameras, crowdsourced tracking maps, such as DeFlock, have led to the cancellation or suspension of camera contracts in at least 30 local municipalities. And the number of others who are concerned is growing.
The other side of this issue is that police departments tell us that this technology is an effective background tool necessary for tracking stolen vehicles, amber alerts, and solving violent crimes. These are certainly valuable and legitimate uses of this technology, and we should welcome these efforts to track and arrest criminals, and have evidence that can be presented against their crimes.
However, just like data centers, and AI -- both of which offer great advantages to the country, but which also contain highly problematic features -- we must find a way for these assets to be used to their highest level of efficiency, but at the same time making sure that the availability of so much personal/private information is only accessed for legitimate and legal purposes.
This will not be an easy task. And the emotional reaction by many, such as the ACLU’s political-infected perspective, will hinder that effort.
