07/30/2026
Flock Safety cameras are being marketed as a crime-fighting tool, but every resident of Tuscarawas County should ask a simple question:
How much privacy are we willing to surrender in exchange for the promise of greater security?
As a Veteran and retired IT Administrator, I've spent decades working with technology. I understand its power—and I also understand how easily technology can be expanded beyond its original purpose. History has shown that government surveillance systems rarely become smaller over time. They usually become larger, more interconnected, and more intrusive.
Flock cameras are not ordinary traffic cameras. They are automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems that capture license plates, vehicle characteristics, the date, time, and location of vehicles traveling on public roads. That information can then be searched and, depending on agency policies and agreements, shared with other law enforcement agencies.
Supporters point out that these systems have helped recover stolen vehicles, locate missing persons, and identify suspects involved in serious crimes. Those are legitimate public safety goals, and no one should dismiss them.
However, those benefits come with significant costs that deserve public debate.
Every vehicle that passes a Flock camera is recorded—not just those connected to criminal investigations. That means the daily movements of law-abiding citizens can become part of a searchable database. Where you worship, attend political meetings, visit a doctor, support a charity, or simply travel around your community may all be documented simply because you drove on a public road.
The issue isn't whether you have "nothing to hide."
The issue is whether government should routinely collect information about innocent people who are not suspected of committing any crime.
Privacy is not something reserved for criminals. It is a constitutional principle that protects everyone.
There are also documented examples showing why oversight matters. News reports have described cases in which individual officers allegedly misused access to Flock systems for unauthorized purposes. Civil liberties organizations have also raised concerns about large-scale data sharing between agencies and the possibility that surveillance tools could be used to monitor constitutionally protected activities. These examples reinforce the need for strong safeguards, transparency, independent audits, and clear limits on how these systems are used.
Technology also changes rapidly. A database that begins as a tool to recover stolen vehicles today could be combined tomorrow with artificial intelligence, facial recognition, predictive analytics, or other technologies that expand government surveillance far beyond its original intent. Once infrastructure is in place, expanding its use is often easier than removing it.
If Tuscarawas County is considering Flock cameras, residents deserve answers before any decision is made:
• What specific problem are these cameras solving?
• How many cameras are proposed?
• Who has access to the data?
• How long is the information retained?
• Which agencies can search it?
• How often are searches audited?
• What penalties exist for misuse?
• Will citizens receive regular transparency reports?
• What independent oversight will exist?
• Can the program be terminated if it fails to meet its goals?
Public safety and individual liberty are not mutually exclusive. We can support law enforcement while also insisting that government surveillance be limited, accountable, transparent, and respectful of constitutional rights.
As Americans, we should never accept the idea that constant government monitoring is simply the price of living in a safe community.
Freedom is not protected by trusting government blindly.
Freedom is protected by holding government accountable.
Opinion Expressed by Joe Rinehart, Veteran & Retired IT Administrator
Paid for by Friends of Joe Rinehart. Joe Rinehart for Tuscarawas County Auditor.
Learn more: JoeRinehart.com
Sources:
• Flock Safety – How the technology works: https://www.flocksafety.com/
• Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) – Automated License Plate Readers: https://www.eff.org/issues/automated-license-plate-readers
• American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) – Privacy & License Plate Readers: https://www.aclu.org/issues/privacy-technology/surveillance-technologies/automatic-license-plate-readers
• U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance – Automated License Plate Reader resources: https://bja.ojp.gov/program/it/privacy-civil-liberties
