Georgia State Patrol used its system of Flock automated license plate reader (ALPR) surveillance cameras to issue a ticket to a motorcyclist who was allegedly looking at his cell phone while riding, according to a copy of the citation obtained by 404 Media. The incident is notable because Flock cameras are not designed for traffic enforcement or minor code violations, and many jurisdictions explicitly\u00a0 tell constituents that the cameras will not be used for traffic enforcement.\u00a0The incident happened December 26 in Coffee County, Georgia. The ticket lists the offense as \u201cHolding\/supporting wireless telecommunications device,\u201d and includes the note \u201cCAPTURED ON FLOCK CAMERA 31 MM 1 HOLDING PHONE IN LEFT HAND.\u201d\u00a0A spokesperson for the Georgia State Patrol told 404 Media that the ticket was issued because of a \u201cunique circumstance\u201d in which a Flock camera happened to capture a traffic infraction, and that Flock cameras are not usually used by the department for traffic enforcement.\u201cThis incident was a rare and unique circumstance where the captured image from the camera exposed an additional violation beyond the vehicle\u2019s expired registration,\u201d the spokesperson said. \u201cThis situation does not reflect a standard enforcement endeavor by the Department of Public Safety.\u201d The traffic citation obtained by 404 Media does not mention that the man\u2019s registration was expired.\u00a0Still, the incident is notable because Flock cameras are often pitched to police as tools for solving serious crimes, finding stolen vehicles, and locating missing people. They distinctly are not traffic cameras and are not pitched as such; the use of a Flock camera in this way shows that the images they capture can sometimes be detailed enough to be used as the pretext for a traffic violation, anyway.\u00a0Many police departments go out of their way to tell community members that Flock cameras are not used for traffic enforcement. For example, the City of Glenwood Springs, Colorado, states in a FAQ that \u201cGSPD [Glenwood Springs Police Department] does not use Flock cameras for traffic enforcement, parking enforcement, or minor code violations.\u201d El Paso, Texas, tells residents \u201cthese are not traffic enforcement cameras. They do not issue tickets, do not monitor speed, and do not generate revenue. They are investigative tools used after crimes occur.\u201d Lynwood, Washington tells residents \u201cthese cameras will not be used for traffic infractions, immigration enforcement, or monitoring First Amendment-protected expressive activity\u201d (Flock cameras have now been used for all of these purposes, as we have reported.)\u00a0The fact that police in Georgia did use Flock cameras for traffic enforcement highlights yet again that, essentially, law enforcement agencies are able to use these cameras for whatever they want. There are very few limitations on what Flock cameras can be used for, and police do not get warrants to search Flock\u2019s network of cameras, either locally or nationwide. Network audits, which are spreadsheets of Flock searches we have obtained via public records requests, have shown that police use Flock for all sorts of reasons; they often do not list any reason at all for searching a license plate.\u00a0The man who was cited in Georgia posted about the incident in an anti-Flock Facebook group asking for advice. He said that he showed up in court and the ticket was dropped. The man did not respond to multiple requests for comment from 404 Media and because he is a private citizen cited for a minor traffic violation, we are not naming him. 404 Media independently obtained the citation.\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"