On Thursday, Flock announced plans to require all agencies with access to license plate reader data to use a safety tool that automatically detects abnormal activity and locks out cops who abuse their access to stalk people they know in their personal lives.
Flock’s audit assistance tool suspends access when user activity “meets defined criteria for abnormal behavior,” Flock said. The suspension can only be lifted by administrator review, with the goal being “to intervene before misuse becomes recurring or widespread.”
Flock’s audit assistance tool suspends access when user activity “meets defined criteria for abnormal behavior,” Flock said. The suspension can only be lifted by administrator review, with the goal being “to intervene before misuse becomes recurring or widespread.”
The tech has been available as an optional free feature since April, but only a third of agencies had opted in, Flock said. However, after a single Georgia sheriff’s office used the tool and subsequently arrested three cops who were separately using Flock cameras to stalk acquaintances, Flock CEO Garrett Langley told The Verge that dozens of incidents like these helped his company realize they made a mistake and had to act to correct it.
“This is such an obvious way to curb abuse,” Langley said, while admitting that “we got this one wrong. We should make it a requirement.”
If it can be lifted by administrator review, it is worthless.
Additionally concerning—although Langley predicted to The Verge that “you are going to see more officers fired and more officers arrested for abusing police power”—experts warn that the public will only know the tool is working if agencies are fully transparent about how much abuse is found.
“Unless we know the number of officers misusing the system, we cannot conclude if Flock and its auditing tools are catching 95 percent of violators or 5 percent,” the ACLU said in a post analyzing Flock’s changes.
Former San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin told SFGate that Flock’s changes “may not be enough.”
“The reforms may catch an officer misusing the tech, but the decision to discipline them falls on local agencies and ultimately falls on whether the agencies are really motivated to take corrective action,” SFGate reported.
Historically, police misconduct is often handled quietly internally, and Boudin pointed out that this makes it easy for cops to conceal bad Flock behavior. He also noted that pursuing criminal charges for misusing internal police tech is already difficult in states without specific statutes outlawing the abuses.
All of this is to save face now that the public’s opinion on Flock has turned so much and it’s been revealed that cops are abusing it.
Yep, their attempts to curtail abuse amount to a nothingburger when cops are responsible for disciplining their own. I don’t even need to pull up numbers for how many credible complaints against the police actually end in punitive measures, I just need to gesture broadly.
I used to work for a state child welfare agency and any and all access to records was monitored and oftentimes you needed to be approved to have access to high-profile cases.
The problem isn’t that you can’t create systems of accountability–you can. The problem is cops will get around any system you create because they know they won’t be fired or sanctioned for circumventing them. The problem is that cops are fundamentally unaccountable.
In other words:
“The reforms may catch an officer misusing the tech, but the decision to discipline them falls on local agencies and ultimately falls on whether the agencies are really motivated to take corrective action,” SFGate reported.
Administrator review?
I’d be willing to bet that a lot of cops are just sharing one login.
I say this as a big technology lover and enthusiast, but we “can’t tech our way out” of most issues in our society, but that seems to be the trend lately
Um, yea, they don’t want to. Never did.
Did you read the article or just the headline?
It’s all a token “look good”.
And no, I didn’t, because we already know Flock’s agenda. So. It’s just more noise, more ragebait.
And if it isn’t, maybe a non-ragebait headline wouldn’t induce a response like mine.
What.
