Automated license plate readers may soon rival data centers as the rage-inducing boogeyman created by Big Tech. The AI-assisted cameras, also known as ALPRs, have drawn scrutiny from lawmakers and civil liberties groups alike who fear that the data collected by ALPRs \u2013 and fed into a national database used by law enforcement \u2013 present privacy concerns.\u00a0<\/p>\n
Public concerns stem from law enforcement\u2019s ability to capture a vehicle\u2019s license plate, make, model, color, bumper stickers, dents, exact location, and timestamp.<\/p>\n
One lawmaker who has led the charge against ALPRs and Flock Safety \u2013 one of the chief manufacturers of the automated license plate readers \u2013 is U.S. Rep. Scott Perry, who wrote in a recent Facebook post<\/a> that Flock\u2019s vehicle scans amount to \u201cmass collection and surveillance \u2013 not safety.\u201d<\/p>\n Below, City & State examines eight major things to know about Flock cameras and ALPRs.<\/p>\n Flock Safety says more than 5,000 law enforcement agencies and 6,000 communities use its automated license plate readers<\/a>, which document license plate numbers and vehicle information and provide access to a national network of data collected by ALPRs. The company estimates<\/a> that roughly 10% of reported crimes in the U.S. are solved using Flock technology, amounting to more than 700,000 crimes each year.\u00a0<\/p>\n There are roughly 3,250 ALPRs in Pennsylvania and the surrounding areas, according to DeFlock<\/a>, an open-source project and crowdsourced database that maps the location of ALPRs, particularly Flock surveillance cameras. Of those, 59% are Flock Safety cameras, largely grouped in urban and suburban areas around cities like Allentown, Harrisburg, Philadelphia and Pittsburgh.\u00a0<\/p>\n Currently, the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation only allows ALPRs to be used on non-PennDOT structures<\/a>, and the installation of new structures for deployment of ALPRs is not permitted.\u00a0<\/p>\n Last year, there were a couple pieces of legislation in Harrisburg targeting the use of ALPRs, though none saw any movement. Former state Rep. Josh Siegel introduced legislation<\/a> to direct PennDOT to establish a permitting process for ALPR technology, while state Rep. Nate Davidson sought to restrict the use for healthcare purposes<\/a>, introducing a bill to prohibit law enforcement agencies from sharing ALPR information for the purpose of investigating or enforcing a law that denies or interferes with a person\u2019s right to obtain healthcare services.\u00a0<\/p>\n Organizations that oppose ALPRs estimate that Flock Safety operates more than 80,000 AI-assisted cameras across 49 states, according to a letter<\/a> signed by the American Civil Liberties Union and a host of other organizations. \u201cThese cameras photograph every vehicle that passes, regardless of any suspicion of wrongdoing. All the data collected \u2013 license plate data, vehicle descriptions, location, and time \u2013 are stored, and a majority of that data is in a centralized, searchable national database that is accessible to law enforcement on demand without court approval,\u201d the letter reads.\u00a0<\/p>\n Americans for Prosperity Senior Regulations Policy Analyst Molly Powell wrote in a policy brief<\/a> that ALPRs present privacy concerns: \u201cAnyone with access to an ALPR system knows who visits churches, mosques, gun ranges, abortion clinics, pro-life advocacy organizations, divorce lawyers, addiction treatment centers, or health care specialists.<\/p>\n