# Police Using Surveillance Cameras With Unprofessional Tags and Vague Search Terms
Law enforcement agencies across the United States are deploying Flock Safety cameras, a network of automatic license plate readers that capture vehicle movements in public spaces, but officers are entering juvenile, irrelevant, and vague search parameters that undermine the system's stated purpose of public safety.
Jalopnik's investigation reveals officers logging searches with tags like "LMAO," "WEIRD KID," "SEXY," and other casual descriptors that have no connection to legitimate law enforcement objectives. The practice highlights a disconnect between technology deployment and professional oversight in departments using Flock's platform.
Flock Safety operates thousands of fixed and mobile cameras nationwide that photograph every license plate passing through their view. Departments subscribe to access a searchable database for vehicle investigations. The system was designed to help locate stolen vehicles, amber alert situations, and vehicles connected to serious crimes. In practice, officers have access to a tool capable of tracking individual movements across wide geographic areas with minimal oversight.
The casual search terms officers are entering suggest systemic problems with training and accountability. When officers tag vehicles or searches with terms like "LMAO" or "WEIRD KID," they are not documenting legitimate investigative leads. Instead, they appear to be using the system for personal amusement or to flag vehicles and drivers based on subjective impressions rather than actionable criminal information.
The Flock database system requires officers to enter a reason for their search. That field is supposed to document the investigative justification. Police departments typically maintain policies requiring officers to cite specific crimes, case numbers, or public safety concerns. The presence of frivolous tags indicates either departments are not enforcing these policies or Flock's interface allows searches without meaningful restrictions.
This matters beyond unprofessionalism. Automatic license plate readers create detailed location histories of millions of Americans. Every vehicle movement gets logged. Combined with other surveillance technologies, these systems allow authorities to establish where people live, work, worship, and socialize. Without rigorous documentation and oversight, officers can conduct de facto tracking of individuals without warrants or probable cause.
Privacy advocates have long opposed automated license plate reader networks. Flock Safety has expanded rapidly despite opposition from civil liberties organizations. The company markets its cameras to police departments with promises of reducing crime. However, deployment outpaces the development of meaningful oversight mechanisms.
The casual search terms suggest departments lack adequate training on appropriate use. They also indicate Flock's system may not enforce strict validation of search justifications. A professional law enforcement system should require specific, documented reasons for every search. A field accepting "LMAO" or "SEXY" is not performing that function.
Departments using Flock need immediate policy reviews. Search documentation must be mandatory and specific. Supervisors should audit searches regularly. Officers should receive training on proper procedures. Flock Safety should implement technical controls that prevent irrelevant search terms from being entered.
Until oversight improves, these systems remain surveillance tools with inadequate safeguards against abuse.