The Flock “Safety” controversy persists. 

Regardless of the state of the automated license-plate reader camera matter at this time, considering that Eugene has taken its cameras down, I’m sure that Flock has not yet conceded the issue. These things have a way of persisting, especially when there’s a lot of money at stake.

Public officials in places like Florence are still wrangling with the idea that all-seeing cameras at various intersections in our towns and cities are helping to solve crime. There is no evidence that the investment in these spying cameras is worth the capitulation of our right to privacy. The mere knowledge that we are subject to being watched by local, county and state law enforcement agencies should strike fear into the heart of every citizen who values being left alone, a right given to us by our forefathers and one that is increasingly being assaulted in the interest of “safety,” or “national security,” or “good citizenship.”

Unless banned by actual city ordinances, I’d bet a fair dollar that traffic cameras will be resurrected. There’s revenue involved for Flock and for local governments, all paid for by unwary motorists.

The emergence of such technology as Flock’s should not be automatically put into use. Today we’re dealing with traffic cameras. Tomorrow the same cameras will be turned on shoppers at Saturday markets, parks and other public places. Perhaps even Ducks football games. Once begun, the insidious expansion of these spying technologies is almost guaranteed.

Bob Burns
Walterville