Flock Safety, a company established in 2017, is emblematic of the increasing reliance on AI-driven policing technologies. The firm provides extensive security camera networks that leverage cloud computing and AI video analysis, offering law enforcement and private entities advanced automatic license plate readers (ALPRs). Flock leases its network of approximately 80,000 cameras, generating $300 million in sales in 2024, and its systems are deployed in over 4,000 cities across 42 states, primarily serving law enforcement agencies and private corporations.

Despite assurances from Flock and law enforcement, the company's surveillance practices have raised significant concerns about potential abuses, including unauthorized data sharing with federal immigration enforcement. Flock's rapid expansion has also led to security vulnerabilities, exposing police systems to various threats. Critics argue that Flock facilitates police overreach and racial profiling, raising alarms about the implications for civil liberties.

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has emphasized the necessity for warrants when employing location-tracking technologies, asserting that the public has a reasonable expectation of privacy. However, Flock has continued to operate in a legal gray area, often bypassing necessary permits and regulations. Recent incidents have highlighted misuse of Flock's technology by police officers, including unauthorized searches related to abortion investigations, prompting public outcry and calls for accountability.

In response to these concerns, some municipalities have begun to challenge Flock's presence. For example, the City of Woodburn, Oregon, temporarily disabled its Flock cameras due to fears of data access by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). Additionally, Denver's city council has expressed serious reservations about Flock's ethics and transparency, reflecting a broader movement against unchecked surveillance practices.

In a separate but related issue, U.S. Senators from both parties are investigating allegations that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth directed military personnel to ensure there were no survivors in airstrikes targeting vessels suspected of drug trafficking. Senators Roger Wicker and Jack Reed released a joint statement acknowledging awareness of reports regarding follow-on strikes on suspected narcotics vessels in the Southern Command (SOUTHCOM) area.

This investigation follows a report from The Washington Post, which claimed that Hegseth ordered military personnel to 'kill everybody' on board a vessel in the Caribbean on September 2. Initial missile strikes reportedly left two survivors, but a Special Operations commander subsequently ordered a second strike to comply with Hegseth's directive, resulting in the deaths of those individuals. The legality of these operations has been questioned by international investigators and members of Congress, with some experts characterizing the actions as extrajudicial killings and potential war crimes.

In response to the allegations, Hegseth defended the operations on social media, asserting that the strikes are lawful under both U.S. and international law. He emphasized that the intent of these military actions is to combat drug trafficking and protect the American public from the dangers posed by narcotics, claiming that all operations are conducted in compliance with the law of armed conflict and have received approval from military and civilian legal authorities throughout the chain of command.