Knox and Hamilton Counties Continue Scrutiny of Flock Cameras

by Kim Jarrett, The Center Square, Sept 6, 2026 - Two Tennessee counties have taken action on automated license plate readers as questions of privacy and efficacy continue. 

Former Knox County Mayor Glenn Jacobs signed a bill this week that would ban Flock cameras in his last action as mayor. 

Hamilton County, Tenn., Sheriff Austin Garrett said his department is pausing the use of Flock License Plate Recognition and Motorola License Plate Recognition. Chattanooga is the county seat. 

"The primary factor is the tremendous concern regarding public data and potential misuse of what is captured," Garrett said in a statement posted on social media. "Within the HCSO program, your Sheriff’s Office oversees approximately 70 cameras across Hamilton County."

Garrett asked state and federal leaders to begin a conversation about the technology. 

U.S. Reps. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., and Eric Burlison, R-Mo., are. They introduced the FLOCK OFF Act, which bans the use of taxpayer money for the technology. 

"The federal government shouldn’t provide 'security' grants to cities and police departments that have gone beyond the pale and turned their communities into a version of 1984," Massie said in a statement.

Flock Safety has defended the use of automated license plate readers, which are now synonymous with the company's name. 

"In 2025, we estimate Flock technology supported more than one million public safety investigations, assisted in 20% of solved cases in jurisdictions that partner with Flock, and helped locate more than 10,000 missing people," the company said in a July email to The Center Square.  "Rather than banning a critical public safety tool, Congress should consider strong, clear safeguards that ensure accountability, oversight, and responsible use are enshrined in law. We do not have to choose between protecting privacy and giving law enforcement the tools it needs to keep communities safe. We can – and should – do both."

A database from the Institute of Justice shows 203 reports of reported abuse of the automated license plate readers as of Sept. 4. The incidents range from the arrests of law enforcement officers who have used the technology in some cases to stalk romantic partners to innocent people being held at gunpoint by police because the camera misread a license plate. 

Law enforcement agencies are defending the use of the cameras, saying they are a tool for capturing criminals.

The Tennessee Bureau of Investigation said use of automated license plate reader technology from Georgia helped the agency find a 1-year-old child taken from Tennessee.

"ALPR information has helped the bureau and its partner agencies locate missing and endangered children and vulnerable adults, identify vehicles associated with wanted fugitives, and develop leads in investigations involving violent crime, drug trafficking, and organized criminal activity," the agency said in a statement.

Christopher Ingraham, an investigative reporter for the Institute for Justice, said in an interview with The Center Square that the fundamental question is whether the crimes would have been solved without the cameras.

"We don't know," Ingraham said. "The thing that I get concerned about is our law enforcement agencies crediting a camera with the entire case when it's really just a small piece of a case."

Rod's Comment: 

I am concerned about the increased loss of privacy. I find it concerning that the government can read the license plate of every car passing through an intersection and follow a car with a network of cameras. 

Much of the loss of privacy is because we voluntarily surrender it. We choose to use a feature on our phones that can know our location at all times. The use of facial recognition software is coming. Facial recognition has already been perfected. There will be a temptation to use it. In a mass protest, the technology is already available that would allow the government to be able to identify everyone in attendance, unless they hid their face. 

Some argue, "I am not doing anything wrong, so I don't care if the government searches my home, or surveils me, or intercepts my email." I do not agree. I find a surveillance state a threat to liberty. I do not want to live in a Big Brother state. I concede that if we were all watched and followed all the time and we no longer had protections against unreasonable search and seizure, it would reduce crime. I am not willing to pay that price for crime reduction.

There may be places and circumstances where license plate readers can be justified, but guardrails on their use need to be in place, and their use should be limited. I welcome the pushback against Flock cameras.

Top Stories