How do Flock cameras work? Former police captain questions criticism of Flock

As controversy surrounding Flock license plate recognition cameras continues, a former Metro Detroit police captain says the technology is being misunderstood and that its crime-fighting benefits outweigh concerns about government surveillance.

Mario Bastianelli, who spent 27 years in law enforcement and served as a captain with the Sterling Heights Police Department, says the cameras provide investigators with valuable information that can help solve crimes more quickly, particularly in departments with limited resources.

Bastianelli, now chief administrative officer of Fortis Group, a Metro Detroit-based security solutions firm, says some of the public's concerns stem from a misunderstanding of how the technology works.

How Flock cameras work

Flock cameras are automated license plate readers that capture images of vehicles traveling on public roadways.

The system records license plates and vehicle characteristics, allowing police departments to search for vehicles that may be connected to criminal investigations.

Bastianelli explained that officers access the system via software with individual logins.

Investigators can search for a specific license plate or use a general vehicle description to narrow down potential matches.

For example, if a bank robbery suspect flees in a vehicle and witnesses provide only a description, investigators can search the database for vehicles matching that description.

The system can also help police identify vehicles potentially involved in kidnappings, missing-person investigations and homicides.

"People have to understand it's an investigative tool," Bastianelli said. "It doesn't do facial recognition."

He emphasized that identifying a vehicle does not automatically identify its driver or establish probable cause for an arrest.

"Just because there's a picture taken doesn't automatically equal probable cause for an arrest, and people need to understand that," Bastianelli said.

Investigators must still corroborate the information, identify the person operating the vehicle and gather additional evidence.

Privacy concerns and the potential for misuse

Despite the potential benefits, Flock cameras have drawn criticism over concerns about government surveillance, data collection and the ability of police to track the movements of people who are not suspected of committing crimes.

Critics question who can access the information, how long it is retained and whether officers could use the system for unauthorized purposes.

Bastianelli acknowledges those concerns.

"I can understand the public's concern in regards to information that's being obtained about themselves," Bastianelli said.

But he argues that the focus should be on how police departments use the information and whether adequate safeguards are in place.

"Just like any system, it could be abused and misused," Bastianelli said. "It's all about accountability. It's all about putting good policy in place."

He said departments should establish clear policies, conduct regular audits and investigate allegations of improper use.

Officers who misuse the technology should face appropriate consequences.

Bastianelli also stressed the importance of transparency when problems occur.

Comparing Flock cameras to existing police technology

Bastianelli compared Flock cameras to Michigan's Law Enforcement Information Network, commonly known as LEIN, which police have used for years to access vehicle registration information and other law enforcement records.

He said officers routinely check license plates through LEIN, and misuse of that system can result in disciplinary action, termination or criminal charges.

While LEIN and Flock serve different functions, Bastianelli believes similar accountability measures should apply to both.

He also questions what he sees as inconsistent public attitudes toward privacy.

Bastianelli pointed to the amount of personal information collected through cellphones, internet searches and digital advertising.

He said people routinely allow technology companies to collect information about their online activity, yet express strong objections to cameras photographing vehicles on public roads.

"That's way more concerning to me than the fact of cameras on a roadway that are taking pictures of cars that are traveling by," Bastianelli said.

However, the comparison highlights an important distinction in the privacy debate: Unlike ordinary license plate checks, automated camera networks can create searchable records of vehicle sightings across multiple locations.

That capability is central to concerns about how the technology could be used to reconstruct a person's movements over time.

A valuable tool for smaller police departments

Bastianelli says one of the technology's biggest advantages is its ability to help smaller police departments investigate crimes without requiring additional personnel.

Departments with limited staffing may not have the resources to dedicate multiple investigators to tracking down a suspect vehicle.

Flock cameras, he said, can provide leads much more quickly.

"That is huge for small police departments that don't have a lot of resources," Bastianelli said.

He believes the technology can be particularly valuable in time-sensitive investigations involving missing children, kidnappings and violent crimes.

While acknowledging the potential for misuse, Bastianelli maintains that the benefits to public safety outweigh the risks when departments implement appropriate safeguards.

He also urges residents to understand the technology before drawing conclusions or taking action against the cameras.

"Have proper information. Have facts in front of you before you make a knee-jerk, you know, decision and reaction, and go tearing down the Flock camera that's on your corner," Bastianelli said.

For Bastianelli, the debate ultimately comes down to balancing public safety with privacy protections — and ensuring police departments remain accountable for how they use the information they collect.