Roads across the US are teeming with automatic license plate recognition (ALPR) cameras. Installed by police, businesses, and private properties, these devices record the license plate, make, model, color, and time of every passing vehicle. According to the community map DeFlock, these cameras operate at approximately 119,000 locations nationwide, and 83 percent of them belong to the company Flock Safety.
How detailed is the data collected?
ALPR systems record not only the license plate number but also the vehicle's make, model, color, and body type. Distinguishing features such as a roof rack, bumper sticker, or missing hubcap can also be detected. The company maintains that the system does not include facial recognition or biometric identification. Each record is stored with the camera's location and a timestamp, creating a log of where and when the vehicle was seen.
How do police use the data?
Law enforcement agencies create lists of stolen vehicles or plates under investigation, and the system sends an instant alert when a match is found. When the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) reviewed 210 million scans over two months, it found that 161 plates triggered false stolen-vehicle alerts, but 337 alerts led to solving actual theft cases. Experts warn that without human verification, the system can be misleading.
Privacy violation concerns
The information of millions of drivers with no criminal suspicion also enters these databases. Privacy advocates say these interconnected camera networks lead to the creation of a detailed driving history without consent. In Colorado, a woman was accused of theft after her vehicle was recorded by a Flock camera, but she proved her innocence with Google location data and dashcam footage. Police later canceled the subpoena and dropped the case.
California's data-sharing ban
California has a law prohibiting local law enforcement from sharing ALPR data with federal or out-of-state agencies. Despite this, California Attorney General Rob Bonta filed a lawsuit in October 2025 alleging that the city of El Cajon shared data with more than 100 out-of-state entities. In January 2026, a court order was sought to halt the sharing. The case highlights the gap between written rules and actual practice.
LAPD suspends access to Flock data
The Los Angeles Police Department suspended access to Flock data after its three-year contract signed in 2023 expired on July 11, 2026. Although the 138 pole cameras across the city continue to operate, police personnel cannot regularly access this data. Officials are negotiating a new contract under which the city would fully own the images and metadata, and Flock would be barred from any sale, publication, or AI training. LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell described the technology as a valuable investigative tool while stressing the need for responsible use.
Flock's statements
Flock states that the cameras do not conduct continuous tracking; each one only captures a snapshot at a specific point. The default data retention period is 30 days, but customers can choose a different duration according to local laws. The company claims it does not use facial recognition, does not sell customer data, and ensures compliance through annual security audits. Still, it is known that a court in Washington ruled that Flock images may be considered public records even if stored by a private firm.
What can drivers do?
You can view cameras in your area at DeFlock.org, but keep in mind that the map is built entirely from volunteer contributions and may be incomplete. Learning your municipality's or police department's ALPR policy is important to understand how long data is kept and with which agencies it is shared. You can also track new camera purchases in advance by searching for "ALPR" or "Flock Safety" in city council agendas.
