Flock camera debate reaches North Texas

Police say flock cameras are a much needed tool in crime fighting, but now there is growing debate over how they're used. Good evening. I'm Clarice Tinsley. Privacy advocates are worried the information those cameras collect might lead to civil rights violations. Fox source Alex Boyer joins us with a closer look. Hi, Alex. Hi, Clarice. And I can tell you that within the last two weeks, I have personally covered two separate stories where flock cameras were used to locate wanted criminals. Now, law enforcement agencies, of course, really praise them and their abilities to help them solve crimes. But there are several advocacy groups as well as some lawmakers who are really concerned about invasion of privacy. Chances are you drive past them every day and don't even notice. There are approximately 670 flock cameras just like these located all across Dallas and plenty more statewide. They're typically mounted on 12 ft poles and have a solar panel on top to power the cameras. Others are mounted on utility poles. They can read license plate numbers and other vehicle details. So just imagine having eyes and ears in the city 24 7 even when law enforcement is not physically present. And that's really what they what they do. Dr Alex still. Carmen is a criminologist. Information from the flock cameras is uploaded into a database that can be accessed by law enforcement agencies across the country. But they're growing popularity and use has led to a recent surge in vandalism to the cameras. The Dallas Police Department says they've started tracking cases in March and since then, some 25 flock cameras have either been cut down or vandalized. The damage comes amid a growing national debate over how the technology is being used and concerns about how the system could be abused. Well, it's this is the issue of the day. I asked constitutional law attorney David Cole about the criticism advocacy groups have with the cameras. Some are concerned the way that they are being used violates the Fourth Amendment, which bans unreasonable searches. But when you just go get a whole bunch of data from somewhere and kind of sift through it, that safeguard is lost and you have the same relationship arguably developing where law enforcement is getting information, but nobody stopped to pass on it. No judgments involved. No magistrate was involved. You've short circuited what the Constitution requires. A north Texas lawmaker recently introduced the so called Privacy Act to protect Americans Fourth Amendment rights. Republican Congressman Keith Self said Americans Fourth Amendment right to be secure in their privacy does not disappear just because of new technology or artificial intelligence. Adding that our government is supposed to get a warrant before invading that privacy. This bill simply restores that protection. Get a warrant here again is criminologist Alex still Carmen. For the most part, I think most law enforcement entities in the United States have used the flock camera technology responsibly, and they are very, very, very effective to the extent that law enforcement continues to subscribe to more. So DPD tells me that while they do not track the number of arrests that are done in connection with the use of flock cameras, they told me in a statement that they do call them quote an essential tool in ensuring the safety in Dallas end quote. Meanwhile, that bill that I told you about right now it is sitting in the introductory stage, which means at this point it has not been assigned to a committee who will further review it to see if it will go any further.