I asked police to send me their public surveillance footage of my car

a year ago

The author conducted a personal surveillance experiment by driving over 300 miles through various communities to see how often their vehicle was captured by Flock license plate reading (LPR) cameras.
Nine out of fifteen law enforcement agencies complied with the author's Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, providing footage of their vehicle, while four agencies denied the request.
Flock cameras capture detailed images of vehicles, including license plates, make, model, and unique identifiers like bumper stickers, creating a 'vehicle fingerprint'.
The author's vehicle was captured multiple times in Roanoke and Staunton, revealing patterns that could predict their movements.
Martinsville, which has 48 Flock cameras, only captured the author's vehicle once, surprising even the police chief.
Danville had a contract with Flock but had not yet installed the cameras at the time of the author's visit.
The author reflects on the ethical implications of public surveillance, including potential misuse for stalking or other personal investigations.
The police's use of Flock cameras raises concerns about oversight and the public's right to access footage of themselves captured in public spaces.
The author observed a real-life example of police requesting surveillance footage from a Dunkin' Donuts to aid in an investigation, highlighting the balance between privacy and public safety.

Hasty Briefsbeta