Flock executive defends crime-fighting cameras as ACLU attorney questions company's motives amid backlash
Flock Safety, which operates controversial Flock cameras now in 49 states, is touting crime clearance rates in cities that use the cameras compared to cities that don't — as a nationwide battle over the surveillance tool rages.
"It's used for any kind of crime really," Phil Arnold, a public affairs manager for the company, told Fox News Digital. "It's very helpful for hit-and-run accidents, also stolen vehicles, property crimes, crimes against people as well."
Arnold is a retired law enforcement officer who served his community in Shorewood, Illinois, for 40 years. He was the chief police executive in the town for 27 years.
FORMER PENTAGON AI CHIEF WARNS FLOCK CAMERAS COULD CREATE 'CHINA-LIKE SURVEILLANCE STATE' IN THE US
Arnold told Fox News Digital that for the last seven years of his career, his department used automatic license plate reader (ALPR) technology, which Flock Safety operates, to help solve crimes, describing the innovation as nothing short of revolutionary.
"Let me give you an example. Before we had this technology, someone would say, 'Hey, I just got robbed, and it was a white Chevy Tahoe,'" Arnold explained. "We would then put out this information, a BOLO [be on the lookout] so to speak, and police officers would stop every white Chevy Tahoe trying to find the offender."
Now, in a similar situation, Flock surveillance cameras narrow the searches to a specific geographic location where a reported crime has occurred, and then photographs of license plates matching the vehicle description can be used to identify possible suspect vehicles.
"So it narrows down the search," Arnold said. "It doesn't inconvenience the people who are just getting stopped because of the car they're driving."
LICENSE PLATE CAMERAS ARE TRACKING DRIVERS EVERYWHERE
Flock provided Fox News Digital data from an internal report regarding crime solving rates in cities that use Flock cameras, compared to cities that don't.
For example, in Tennessee, Nashville cleared only 7% of motor vehicle thefts in the first half of 2026, versus 40% in Flock-equipped Hendersonville, a smaller city about 16 miles away, according to the data.
"Aggravated assault clearance followed the same pattern: 41% vs. 95%. Only 3% of vehicle break-ins were solved in Nashville, compared with 50% in Hendersonville.
Those patterns, according to Flock, hold true in places all over the country.
Where Hillsborough, North Carolina, which does not use Flock, cleared 0% of vehicle thefts in the time studied, nearby Burlington cleared 46% of the same cases.
In Flock-less Ann Arbor, Michigan, solve rates were lower than in nearby Van Buren Township.
FLOCK CEO, TECH RIVAL CALLED OUT TO TESTIFY BEFORE SENATORS OVER AI CAMERA PRIVACY CONCERNS
Flock described Eugene, Oregon, as "the most telling case."
"Flock cameras ran through October 2025, then were removed," the report says. "Motor-vehicle-theft clearance fell from 15% to 9%; burglary clearance dropped from 21% to 15%.
"Nearby Medford, still running Flock, cleared 29% of vehicle thefts & 25% of burglaries over the same period."
But not everyone is singing Flock's praises.
Skeptical communities nationwide have petitioned their local governments to do away with the technology. Some argue that it is intrusive and unnecessary, while others say it's unconstitutional.
On Thursday, a federal judge in Oklahoma ruled that a police deputy who used Flock to access a woman's driving history over the previous month, and then used the historical data to pull her over, violated her Fourth Amendment rights. She was in possession of 91 pounds of methamphetamine at the time of the stop.
Chad Marlow is a senior policy counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), where his focus is privacy and surveillance.
He argued there's not necessarily causation between implementing Flock cameras and solving crimes.
"It's a different city. It's a different size. What were the auto theft rates beforehand? What are the poverty rates in that city?" he asked. "What are the philosophies of the police department? Like, how many police are dedicated to trying to prevent or solve car thefts in one city versus the other?"
Privacy is a major question surrounding Flock cameras, and many places are having a robust debate on the level of surveillance they want on their streets, and whether their data should be collected by a private company working in tandem with the police.
"I think a common misconception is that when the car goes past the camera, and it captures the image of the back of the vehicle and the license plate, which is all it does, you can't see who's driving the car, you can't see who the passenger is. It just captures the back of the car and the license plate," Arnold explained.
INNOCENT WOMAN SAYS POLICE USE OF FLOCK CAMERA LED TO 13 DAYS IN JAIL
He added that the data is not accessed except when law enforcement is searching for a suspect, and that police officers need a Computer Aided Dispatch (CAD) report or a case report number to access any data. The data is retained for 30 days, according to Arnold.
But cases of police officers using ALPR technology for purposes outside its law enforcement scope are piling up. A Washington Post analysis identified at least 50 cases of rogue officers abusing the tool, with many cases involving stalking of ex-lovers.
Meanwhile, the constitutionality of the surveillance remains up for debate.
"The Constitution establishes our right to privacy, and it establishes that people's personal effects and their private information cannot be accessed by the government without a warrant, without probable cause," Marlow said, noting that it's not just Flock Safety using ALPR technology, and that companies like Axon and Motorola sell the technology, too.
"But it's very fair for Americans to look out and be like, 'You know what, If I'm not accused of doing anything wrong, I don't want the government tracking everywhere I go in my vehicle for days, weeks, months, or even years. I don't want that happening, and even if the Constitution says it's allowed, I don't want my laws saying it's allowed.'"
Arnold told Fox News Digital that Flock is open to government regulation of the tools.
"We want legislation passed," he said. "Our CEO, Garrett Langley called, gosh, probably a month-and-a-half ago, asking legislators to please ... put the laws in place that will regulate this.
"We want it regulated. We don't want people misusing the system. We've seen this in the news."
He added: "Nobody dislikes a bad officer more than a good officer."
Marlow says the company is asking for regulation to save its business amid the backlash it has recently received.
"Flock suddenly coming to the table now is because they have no choice," he said, noting that company only recently declared that it would drop the standard data retention period to 30 days. "Flock didn't do that because it suddenly got a conscience, [or] it's suddenly decided to be ethical. It did it because it needed a PR bump."
The bottom line for Arnold is that the tool helps police officers, and that help is desperately needed.
"It's so good for the manpower of a police department, you know? Most police departments across the country are a little shorthanded. Not everybody wants to be the police anymore. So it truly does help in those cases," Arnold said. "It is a tool that is a force multiplier for sure, and I've seen that firsthand being a chief of police using the technology."