SEPT 2026. Blues Vol 42 No.9

plate and a direction of

plate and a direction of travel. A network of license plate readers can turn that limited information into a lead. That lead can mean the difference between locating the suspect in minutes and saving an innocent child. Or finding him days later—or never. And the child? Probably not alive. Critics are right to warn that technology can be abused. Police officers are human beings, and any system accessible to human beings requires accountability. No police department should expect the public to simply trust that information will never be misused. There must be strict rules just like the use of TCIC, NCIC, and other LE databases. And access should be limited to legitimate law-enforcement purposes. Agencies should maintain audit trails showing who accessed information and why. Unauthorized searches should carry real consequences. Data retention should be limited to what is necessary. Policies should be transparent, and supervisors should be held accountable for violations. Those safeguards don't weaken law enforcement. They strengthen the public’s confidence in it. But we also need perspective. A license plate reader does not know that the person driving the vehicle is guilty of a crime. It doesn’t make an arrest. It doesn’t testify in court. It simply provides information that investigators can use alongside other evidence. Police officers still have to investigate. They still have to establish probable cause where required. Prosecutors still have to prove cases and Judges and 24 The BLUES SEPTEMBER ‘26 juries still make decisions about guilt. The camera is a tool—not the justice system. Some opponents argue that people have a right to move around without being observed. But we should also recognize that modern society has already changed dramatically. Businesses, apartment complexes, toll roads, parking facilities, banks and private security systems use cameras every day. Every Traffic light in this country has a camera and they are watching all of us. We willingly surrender certain amounts of privacy in exchange for security and convenience. The question is not whether technology should exist. It’s whether we can use it responsibly. And when the technology helps solve violent crimes, locate stolen vehicles, identify suspects and protect vulnerable victims, the benefits can be enormous. Law enforcement officers are routinely criticized when a crime goes unsolved. Families ask why police couldn't find the person responsible. Communities demand answers when dangerous criminals remain on the streets. Then, when police receive a tool that can help answer those questions, some of the same critics’ demand that the tool be eliminated because it might be misused. It’s a no-win situation. That’s why we should demand accountability and give officers the tools necessary to do their jobs. The answer isn't to abandon Flock cameras. The answer is to establish clear policies, strong oversight and meaningful penalties for abuse. If an officer or administrator misuses the system for personal reasons, they should face consequences. One person's misconduct should not eliminate a technology that can potentially protect thousands of innocent people. Every generation of policing has faced this same debate. Fingerprints were once considered revolutionary. DNA changed investigations forever. Body cameras changed the relationship between police and the public. Digital evidence transformed criminal investigations. Flock cameras are another step in that evolution. The goal should never be mass surveillance. The goal should be public safety. If we can build a system where technology helps police find criminals while strong safeguards protect innocent citizens from abuse, then we should pursue that balance rather than choosing one side of the argument. At The BLUES, we believe the rights of law-abiding Americans must be protected. But we also believe the safety of those Americans matters. When a technology can help bring a child home, identify a killer, recover a stolen vehicle or stop a dangerous criminal before another person becomes a victim, the potential benefits are too significant to ignore. Protect the public. Protect privacy. Demand accountability. But don't take away a tool that can help police protect the people we ask them to protect.

The BLUES - SEPTEMBER ‘26 25