loading
loading
Flock drones with cameras deployed as first responders in some US cities amid privacy concerns — UAVs connect to wider emergency services system and streams video to dispatchers, officers These drones could cut emergency response times to under two minutes, but at what cost? Several towns and cities in the U.S. are experimenting with Flock’s Drones-as-First-Responder (DFR) system, which employs remotely operated drones that automatically launch from rooftop docks. According to Military.com, these units are integrated into emergency services systems, which can send drones in response to a 911 call, license-plate reader notification, or gunshot-detection alert. Once in the air, these units stream live footage to dispatchers and officers in the field. Flock initially gained this capability when it purchased drone firm Aerodome, which sells drones with high-definition video, thermal imaging, and other onboard capabilities. It’s also not the only company advertising similar services, with one startup advertising a Starlink-connected first responder drone that lets it operate outside the range of its base station. Some of the cities that are considering, have run a pilot project, or have signed a contract with Flock for its DFR system include Fort Worth, Texas; Castle Rock, Colorado; Dunwoody, Georgia; Fulton County, Georgia; and Middletown, Connecticut. Fort Worth said that during the two-month pilot program, the drone was deployed to 162 emergency 911 calls, with an average response time of 112 seconds. It was also the first unit to arrive in 76 of these calls and even allowed the authorities to clear 11 of them without needing to send officers to the scene. Furthermore, the city said that these units only respond to calls and do not patrol the skies over Fort Worth, and that the cameras on board their drones are pointed at the horizon until they reach the scene. The company has recently been surrounded by controversy, especially when it comes to the misuse of its system and the apparent lack of security, despite the company maintaining that it has never suffered a data breach. Despite that, Middletown Police Chief Erik Costa was quoted telling CT Insider, “The drone’s purpose is not surveillance; it’s first response.” He also added that drone footage from the city “would not be shared…outside the building unless there is a search warrant” and that unused video recordings “would be erased within 30 days.” Other cities have considered and turned down offers to run Flock’s DFR service within their jurisdictions. Berkeley, California, said no to a $2-million proposal that would have expanded its existing license-plate cameras to include drones, more cameras, and software, while Bridgeport, Connecticut, rejected a $500,000 lease for two DFR drones. Even the mayor of Middletown declined to sign the contract despite the city having approved a trial earlier this year. The most common reasons cited for these refusals include privacy concerns and fears that the data gathered in their areas of responsibility could be shared with or accessed by federal authorities without a warrant, even as Flock claims that it does not work with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). While emergency responders find DFR and other similar services useful, the primary reason people oppose Flock’s service isn’t the drone units themselves, but the lack of trust in the company and the institutions that use them. So, unless the authorities address the underlying concerns, it’s likely that any type of surveillance — whether strapped to a pole or flying overhead — will always face some kind of resistance from the public. 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. Jowi Morales is a tech enthusiast with years of experience working in the industry. He’s been writing with several tech publications since 2021, where he’s been interested in tech hardware and consumer electronics. - TheCyberKender And, just like with the stationary cameras, the competition (Axon, Motorola, etc.) are also moving to sell such drones.Reply - TechieTwo The privacy concerns are laughable when there are cameras all over in society and every person on the planet carries 5 cellphones - all with cameras. The only one that should be concerned about Flock or other cameras are the criminals. Unless you can turn back the clock of time 20 years or more you don't have a chance of removing cameras from society.Reply - USAFRet TechieTwo said:The privacy concerns are laughable when there are cameras all over in society and every person on the planet carries 5 cellphones - all with cameras. The only one that should be concerned about Flock or other cameras are the criminals. Unless you can turn back the clock of time 20 years or more you don't have a chance of removing cameras from society.One of the main privacy concerns is what happens to the footage. Video from your cell phone or the security camera on my house is not searchable by the state without a signed warrant. Flock and the others pipe that video direct to the states database, no warrant needed. Reply - Bryanhat Admin said:U.S. cities consider deploying Flock drones that automatically respond to emergency calls. However, other jurisdictions are pushing back against the service due to privacy and other concerns. Flock drones with cameras deployed as first responders in some US cities amid privacy concerns : Read more Why would it matter if your not a criminal why should you worry is the most brainless answer to any question involving governmental authority I ever heard . Look at china people. Look really hard at your future. If government declares a disagreement between you and government makes you a criminal punished by prison time would you jump on the train so fast? Reply - smoolz TechieTwo said:The privacy concerns are laughable when there are cameras all over in society and every person on the planet carries 5 cellphones - all with cameras. The only one that should be concerned about Flock or other cameras are the criminals. Unless you can turn back the clock of time 20 years or more you don't have a chance of removing cameras from society.If this is your take, it's because you don't fully grasp the invasion of privacy that this camera network brings. Do your research and stop regurgitating weak meaningless right wing talking points like "if you've got nothing to hide..." Reply - TheCyberKender TechieTwo said:The privacy concerns are laughable when there are cameras all over in society and every person on the planet carries 5 cellphones - all with cameras. The only one that should be concerned about Flock or other cameras are the criminals. Unless you can turn back the clock of time 20 years or more you don't have a chance of removing cameras from society.Let's see... Shively PD officer Asad Zahir tracked the activity of their ex, using Flock. Haines City PD officer Christopher Goodson tracked their estranged wife, using Flock. Moorsville PD officer Elizabeth Snowman tracked her boyfriend's ex-wife, using Fock. Five Indianapolis officers, Michael Rogers, Jonathan Schultz, Cassandra Crawley, Matthew Binford, and Abigal Cramer, were all charged with misusing Flock systems to stalk a variety of people. Reply - Joomsy TechieTwo said:The privacy concerns are laughable when there are cameras all over in society and every person on the planet carries 5 cellphones - all with cameras. The only one that should be concerned about Flock or other cameras are the criminals. Unless you can turn back the clock of time 20 years or more you don't have a chance of removing cameras from society.So, what's your home address? I'd like to come stand in your yard, and just stare at your house. I might even take a peep through the windows at any given moment. Y'know, for funsies. If you've got nothing to hide, you should be totally fine with me, as well as the rest of the world, doing this. Reply - scottslayer TheCyberKender said:Let's see... Shively PD officer Asad Zahir tracked the activity of their ex, using Flock. Haines City PD officer Christopher Goodson tracked their estranged wife, using Flock. Moorsville PD officer Elizabeth Snowman tracked her boyfriend's ex-wife, using Fock. Five Indianapolis officers, Michael Rogers, Jonathan Schultz, Cassandra Crawley, Matthew Binford, and Abigal Cramer, were all charged with misusing Flock systems to stalk a variety of people.The Institute For Justice has a tracker that covers more than Flock. https://ij.org/the-ij-database-of-alpr-abuse/ Reply
document fetched 2026-10-03 02:54 · canonical https://tomshardware.com/tech-industry/drones/flock-drones-with-cameras-deployed-as-first-responders-in-some-us-cities-amid-privacy-concerns-uavs-connect-to-wider-emergency-services-system-and-streams-video-to-dispatchers-officers