Rahul Sidhu

One of the most prolific criminals in all of San Francisco tells @adam22 that “crime in San Francisco is over with” because of Flock cameras + drones. He complains that he can’t even do drivebys anymore. It’s simple: when the risk of getting caught is too high, crime plummets.

@WallStreetApes For the folks reading this, @WallStreetApes is posting fake news for engagement bait. Flock never sent this letter. theverge.com/tech/964425/fl…

Flock Safety Cameras sent a cease and desist letter to an American saying he must stop making social media posts about them Flock threatens legal action if he posts anything on social media they deem “fake news” WOW “I have received a cease and desist from Flock Cameras, and they said if I make any more posts telling my fans to put f*ck Flock stickers on camera, then I will get pursued with legal action. And I can't make any more false or fake news posts — They said no more f*cking talking bad” I looked it up and they can’t enforce the social media post threats The cease and desist letter is legal, but it has limits on what Flock can actually enforce: They cannot outright ban you from posting on social media or criticizing them. The First Amendment protects your right to free speech, including negative opinions, memes and commentary about public companies and products So no they cannot enforce this, however They can sue if your posts cross into: - Defamation, meaning provably false statements causing harm, not just opinions like “F*ck Flock” - Incitement to vandalism like encouraging illegal damage to their property According to Grok: Cease and desist letters are common “scare tactics” used by companies to deter criticism. Many are overbroad and not fully enforceable

@JasonBassler1 @JasonBassler1 was looking to DM you but couldn't find a way to do it. Can you shoot me a DM?

"We have cameras everywhere in that town and you cannot get a breath of fresh air without us knowing" When police are admitting this out loud, it's time to admit the cage isn’t coming, we're already inside it.

@Whiplash437 Here’s my response to the last paid content guy who posted this

BREAKING: Evanston, Illinois has ordered Flock Safety to remove all cameras after a state audit found that the company had improperly shared Illinois data with federal agencies.

@HealthRanger You keep posting this fake news for engagement. This is a fake letter, Flock never sent this. theverge.com/tech/964425/fl…

Hilarious. Fck Flock. Throw their laughable "cease and desist" letters in the trash and demand their privacy-violating cameras be removed from all locations!

@ImBreckWorsham theverge.com/tech/964425/fl…

@ImBreckWorsham You guys keep posting this completely fake, unsigned, typo riddled letter. Flock never sent this letter. You’re trying to mislead people.

"Cease and desist" from Flock Group INC.

@GeneralMCNews This "breaking news" is from August, 2025. It's being re-posted by @GeneralMCNews as engagement bait, and to mislead people into thinking it just happened.

@PoliceThePolic1 The Flock camera doesn’t “flag someone as suspicious”. An alert means a plate matched a list (stolen, wanted, AMBER). Policies require an officer to visually confirm plate + state before acting and every search is logged and audited with a documented reason.

Q: If Flock cameras can flag you as “suspicious” because of an algorithmic guess, what protects you when that guess is wrong?

@SallyMayweather Is that Indian Mel Gibson

@ItsMattsLaw 😂

Have you people never seen what a real cease and desist looks like

@HealthRanger You guys are purposely spreading disinformation. Not only is the letter completely fake, but it wasn’t even addressed to Jason. x.com/rahul/status/2…

Flock is now threatening Jason Bassler with legal action for exercising his First Amendment right to mock and criticize Flock. Hopefully he knows this letter carries no legal weight whatsoever. Flock increasingly looks like a bunch of lawless THUGS who violate your right to privacy and then threaten you for complaining about it. Fck Flock.

@QuakerPepe @The1Parzival This is a totally fair take, IMO. ALPR cameras are not looking in people's cars or reading what's on their phone.

@The1Parzival @rahul Violations of our fourth amendment. If they're monitoring traffic and interactions that are basically public, then I don't have any problem. If they're looking in people's cars and reading what's on their phone, then I have a severe problem.

👋👋👋 - Hey .@rahul do you feel your business doors closing for good yet? - Don't worry it'll sink in. 🤣🤣🤣

@Patrickwebb @YahooNews I am not lying, Patrick. You said “chicago made $60M last year from unconstitutional speeding tickets used by flock” That is not true. You are a journalist, show me your source.

@rahul @YahooNews you’re lying and hiding behind semantics. flock cameras are used to help issue speeding tickets. quit being dishonest.

Another disinformation example from @YahooNews. The lady in this story is in Australia, where Flock does not operate. The camera wasn't a Flock camera. This has been debunked so many times. People are creating/spreading this stuff to create as much fear as possible.

@JasonBassler1 You're posting a fake letter.

🔥🔍 The new gold standard of anti-surveillance accountability just dropped 👇

@ipvideo Credit where credit is due. Shoutout to @bennjordan for the redaction here. He may not be a Flock fan, but I respect the integrity.

Shoutout to @ipvideo for posting this so I could see it. Another fake cease and desist letter that Flock did not send. This one isn’t even signed. The grammar is terrible, so lazy. The mass disinformation campaign continues.

Credit where credit is due. Shoutout to @bennjordan for the redaction here. He may not be a Flock fan, but I respect the integrity.

People ask me about the mass Flock disinformation campaign. This is a really good example. Flock never sent this letter, these people made it up (with a forged signature) to try to manipulate people. We are pro-democracy. People SHOULD have discussions and lectures like this.

This post misleadingly combines 2 different issues. We have never claimed ACLU-NM designed Flock’s ALPR system, that's not what Trevor's post said. It is is equally inaccurate to suggest there was no engagement around New Mexico’s SB 40. ACLU-NM’s own Daniel Williams said Flock made assurances to “us during the process of the passage of SB40.” This bill was passed with involvement and discussions with ACLU-NM, law enforcement, legislators, and Flock over retention, data sharing, legislative text, and implementation. “Legislative collaboration” or “stakeholder engagement” would have been more precise than “partnership,” but the underlying engagement was real.

🚨 Flock has repeatedly misled the public. Example #23,527: Flock falsely told city council officials it worked with the ACLU. Not once. Twice. The ACLU's response? "We have never partnered with Flock. We never helped design its system." That's a pretty HUGE red flag. 🚩

@JasonBassler1 This is fake, Jason. Flock never sent this letter. It's not even a good fake letter. x.com/rahul/status/2…

@tyleraloevera @ipvideo Hey man, like I mentioned in our DMs, it’s hard for me to look at your content and feel like we would be represented fairly. But like I also said in our DMs, send me whatever questions you have and I will happily answer them.

@rahul @ipvideo Rahul. Why would you be concerned about an on camera interview if Flock has nothing to hide? You keep claiming there’s a mass disinformation campaign, but are dodging an interview with me to set the record straight. Let’s make this happen.