This stuff is a lot simpler than people think. Do we use modern technology to keep our communities safe? A license plate reader on a public roadway that locates the amber alert vehicle, or locates the shooter before they conduct the mass shooting. A gunshot detection sensor that directs responders to the victim bleeding out on the sidewalk. A drone that warns officers of the suspect who is hiding with a gun around the corner, ready to ambush them. This isn't even hyperbole. These are real (and recent) examples of Flock's technology protecting communities around the country.

@rahul Technology to keep us safe is a great idea. Technology that gives cops a warrantless way to track the movements of every man and woman in their jurisdiction is an absurd violation of our rights. Your attempt to conflate the two is plainly self serving bullshit.

I think it's certainly reasonable to want technology to keep us safe, as long as the technology is not violating our rights. A few things to clear up for others reading: 1. The term "warrantless tracking" implies that the police are accessing private information that would otherwise require a warrant. These are automated license plate readers (ALPR) on public roadways that are not accessing private information. It's akin to a police officer driving behind a vehicle on a public roadway and running the license plate. 2. The courts have ruled, on numerous occasions, that ALPR systems are not a violation of rights. Just saying that they are does not make that true. 3. All searches require justifications. All search history is auditable. The system is built around the accountability of its use, with an emphasis on civil-liberties safeguards. We are strong advocates for holding those who attempt to abuse the system accountable, just as I (as a former full-time cop) am an advocate for holding any officers accountable if they abuse their powers. 4. ALPR systems do not "track the movement of people", they capture the location of license plates/vehicles at moments in time, and they alert law enforcement if that license plate is relevant to a public safety issue (IE: amber alert, stolen vehicle, etc). GPS-tracking, cell-phone tracking, etc, tracks people's movements and requires a warrant to do so. These are two totally different things. 5. All systems are compliant with local/state/federal laws regarding data retention, which is commonly set to 30 days (unless the law requires otherwise).

@rahul Your comparison to a cop driving along the road is dumb. A historical nationwide data set is not anything like a cop driving around remembering cars they saw. It’s absurd for you to pretend these are equivalent situations.