Flock Safety’s controversial license plate recognition cameras have become a growing concern for those worried about privacy and surveillance. Despite multiple reports of police officers misusing the technology, the company says it has never terminated a law enforcement customer over abuse of its systems.
That admission came from Flock CEO Garrett Langley during an interview at TechCrunch Disrupt 2026 in San Francisco. He insisted the company would cut ties with customers who knowingly broke the law, although that hasn’t happened yet.
Flock operates a network of more than 100,000 cameras across the United States, capturing license plate information as vehicles pass by. Police departments can use the resulting data to investigate crimes and track vehicles, sometimes across jurisdictional boundaries.
However, the technology has attracted criticism following cases involving officers using the system to stalk people or conduct unauthorized searches. Those incidents have raised questions about whether Flock and its customers are doing enough to prevent misuse.
Flock Says Misconduct Could Cost Police Departments Their Access
“If a customer knowingly broke the law, we would fire them immediately. That’s very easy,” Langley told TechCrunch.
However, he acknowledged that the company has never actually terminated a customer for abusing its products. He suggested the decision becomes complicated when misconduct involves only a handful of officers within a larger department.
“Most of the debate is nuanced into ‘what if two officers out of fifty were caught?'” Langley explained. He argued that terminating an entire department’s access could deprive a community of technology used to investigate crimes.
Flock maintains that its cameras help law enforcement recover stolen vehicles, locate missing people, and solve serious crimes. Langley cited an incident involving a stolen vehicle with a baby inside as an example of the system’s potential benefits.
Police Misuse Has Raised Serious Questions
Several officers across the country have faced disciplinary action or criminal allegations after reportedly using license plate databases for personal purposes. Some cases have involved tracking former partners or other individuals without legitimate investigative reasons.
Critics argue that the problem extends beyond individual officers to how departments supervise access to sensitive vehicle-location information. The ability to search records across a large camera network makes effective oversight particularly important.
The controversy has prompted some communities to cancel Flock contracts or allow them to expire. Others have questioned whether the public-safety benefits outweigh the privacy risks associated with widespread vehicle tracking.
Flock Faces Growing Public Backlash
Protesters gathered outside the TechCrunch conference while Langley was speaking, criticizing the company’s surveillance technology. Demonstrators called for greater accountability and stronger restrictions on how license plate data is collected and accessed.
Langley defended Flock’s role in helping police investigate crimes and said the company has no plans to sell itself to rival surveillance technology provider Axon. Still, his comments leave a significant question unanswered.
If Flock is willing to terminate customers for serious misuse, what exactly would it take for the company to act? With no police departments dropped so far, critics are likely to keep asking where Flock draws that line.