# Police are reportedly pulling motorists over because AI algorithms deem their driving patterns 'suspicious' — retained record

> Retained news record from news:toms-hardware.

Canonical: https://highsignal.app/data/records/50e372cdff162e75

[← sources](https://highsignal.app/data)


source: [news](https://highsignal.app/data/news) (news:toms-hardware)  published 2026-10-27 13:53 ingested 2026-10-28 02:51

[original source ↗](https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/police-reportedly-pulling-motorists-over-because-ai-algorithms-deem-their-driving-patterns-suspicious-rights-group-report-warns-ai-surveillance-systems-will-sweep-in-more-innocent-people-than-wrongdoers)

## retained text



```
Police reportedly pulling motorists over because AI algorithms deem their driving patterns 'suspicious' — rights group report warns AI surveillance systems will sweep in more innocent people than wrongdoers
Officers may look for a minor traffic violation to justify pulling the driver over
Police are increasingly using AI-derived pretext to justify pulling drivers over, claims a report by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) on October 26. According to Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the ACLU Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project, police are using AI algorithms and automated license plate reader (ALPR) surveillance data to flag motorists whose travel histories appear “suspicious,” even without evidence of wrongdoing.
Condemning the approach and the use of mass surveillance in general, Stanley expressed concerns that this approach to law enforcement would lead to an uptick in the controversial “pretextual stops” and that “More and more people will be subject to police encounters as these AI algorithms inevitably sweep in far more innocent people than actual wrongdoers.” The report details several incidents, including one in which a woman claims an officer stopped her during a cross-country road trip because a surveillance system he was using had flagged her movements as suspicious. The system has accessed ALPR data on where she had been driving.
ALPRs installed along roads and highways photograph passing vehicles and record their registration numbers, locations, and timestamps. By combining sightings from different cameras, law enforcement can determine where a vehicle has traveled, which routes it used, and how frequently it visited particular locations. An AI system with access to the surveillance data can quickly analyze huge amounts of data and identify patterns it has been trained to deem as “suspicious,” triggering an alert to law enforcement. Stanley implies officers may receive the alert and look for a minor traffic violation to justify pulling the driver over. In some documented cases, officers have concealed the actual reason for the stop.
The report comes amid growing concerns about the impact of massive mass surveillance camera networks, such as privacy, abuse, and limited regulation. Several officers have been fired for abusing the Flock surveillance system. License plate readers have existed for years and have traditionally helped police track known suspects or locate a vehicle already associated with a crime, such as a stolen car. However, the current scale and blanket surveillance are unprecedented. Security researchers disclosed a network of over 335,000 Flock ALPR cameras across the United States.
Using AI, systems can also now analyze large collections of vehicle movements and generate new suspects based on behavioral patterns. Companies such as Flock Safety have been developing AI-enhanced surveillance systems that can identify “unusual” travel behavior and associations between vehicles, marketing them as effective crime-prevention tools.
Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Etiido Uko is a news contributor for Tom's Hardware covering the latest updates in big tech and the PC industry. He is a mechanical engineer and senior technical writer with over nine years of experience in documentation and reporting. He is deeply passionate about all things engineering and technology, and is an expert in gadgets, manufacturing, robotics, automotive, and aerospace.
- TechieTwo You don't need AI to know most people's driving is dangerous and their travel patterns suspicion when they show up at drug houses daily. ;)Reply
- Rand0m_Guy Where I live because of Flock, a woman was pulled over, order out of her car at gun point, thrown to the ground, and handcuffed for over an hour on an unwarranted stop generated by Flocks AI. If anyone want to look it up, August 2026 woman named Amber Newell in Wisconsin.
Brookfield Police: Defended the stop, stating their officers' actions were "consistent" with the information available to them at the time. They told Newell the mistake wasn't their fault and directed her to blame the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD).
Milwaukee Police: Declined on-camera interviews, chalking the terrifying incident up to a simple "data entry mistake" and a "personnel issue". They admitted staff failed to remove an old wanted alert from the system but offered no concrete plan for how they would prevent it from happening again.
Flock Safety: Typically maintains that they are merely the infrastructure provider, pointing out that local law enforcement agencies are entirely responsible for the accuracy of the data entered into the network.Cops made an unwarranted, unverified illegal stop.
Flock facilitated the false red flag and broadcasted it. They are more than infrastructure, they actively generate alerts and use AI for predictive behavior to faster generate these alerts.
Cops (remote) entered incorrect information into system with no checks or balances
Cant see how this any of this can go wrong?!?!? (sarcasm) I wish I could post memes, I have this great one with 3 spidermans. Reply
- PEnns Rand0m_Guy said:Where I live because of Flock, a woman was pulled over, order out of her car at gun point, thrown to the ground, and handcuffed for over an hour on an unwarranted stop generated by Flocks AI. If anyone want to look it up, August 2026 woman named Amber Newell in Wisconsin.
Brookfield Police: Defended the stop, stating their officers' actions were "consistent" with the information available to them at the time. They told Newell the mistake wasn't their fault and directed her to blame the Milwaukee Police Department (MPD).
Milwaukee Police: Declined on-camera interviews, chalking the terrifying incident up to a simple "data entry mistake" and a "personnel issue". They admitted staff failed to remove an old wanted alert from the system but offered no concrete plan for how they would prevent it from happening again.
Flock Safety: Typically maintains that they are merely the infrastructure provider, pointing out that local law enforcement agencies are entirely responsible for the accuracy of the data entered into the network.Cops made an unwarranted, unverified illegal stop.
Flock facilitated the false red flag and broadcasted it. They are more than infrastructure, they actively generate alerts and use AI for predictive behavior to faster generate these alerts.
Cops (remote) entered incorrect information into system with no checks or balances
Cant see how this any of this can go wrong?!?!? (sarcasm) I wish I could post memes, I have this great one with 3 spidermans.
Ah yes, the blame game / finger pointing at each other in a circle circus. They used to blame the computer. now they blame the computer, the personnel and AI!
Nobody had EVER expected that mass surveillance would snag innocent people at all. These things happen only on TV...and " Citizens: if you're innocent, you got nothing to fear!!"
/s Reply
- ravewulf A society needs some sort of law enforcement, but US police forces keep demonstrating over and over again how little they can be trusted and/or reformed.Reply
- bigdragon One of my neighbors got hit with an AI camera fine for using their cell phone while driving during a trip. The photo clearly shows them holding a Poptart with a corner already bitten off. Why are these cameras able to issue fines or drive aggressive police responses when they can't even distinguish a Poptart from a cell phone or a Doritos bag from a weapon?Reply
- Rabohinf TechieTwo said:You don't need AI to know most people's driving is dangerous and their travel patterns suspicion when they show up at drug houses daily. ;)How those boots taste? Reply
- bit_user garrett040 said:Getting closer and closer to Minority report.Right. Without any direct signs of wrong-doing, pulling over motorists to "check" them feels awfully close to a 4th Amendment violation.
gg83 said:PreCrime here we go! AI are the Clairvoyants floating in the poolBut, at least those were humans.
Also, people should go back and re-watch the movie or read a summary, because pre-crime wasn't itself the actual problem that the movie dealt with.It was the abuses of the system that became possible when evidence of an actual crime was no longer required for a conviction.No less disturbing, but slightly deeper than just pre-crime. Reply
- bit_user bigdragon said:One of my neighbors got hit with an AI camera fine for using their cell phone while driving during a trip. The photo clearly shows them holding a Poptart with a corner already bitten off.Wow, that's crazy! Were they able to challenge it? Reply
```



document fetched 2026-10-28 02:51 · canonical https://tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/police-reportedly-pulling-motorists-over-because-ai-algorithms-deem-their-driving-patterns-suspicious-rights-group-report-warns-ai-surveillance-systems-will-sweep-in-more-innocent-people-than-wrongdoers