WINONA, Minn. (Valley News Live) - Every Flock license plate reader camera operated by the Winona Police Department has been sawed off and stolen in what investigators believe was a coordinated theft.

All eight cameras were taken Aug. 1, according to the Winona Police Department. A patrol officer first noticed the cameras had not sent any alerts in 24 hours. When officers checked the locations, they found the cameras had been cut from their poles and taken. The poles were left behind.

Two additional Flock cameras on the Mississippi River Bridge, owned by Buffalo County, were also stolen in the same manner.

Each camera is valued at approximately $3,000, putting the total loss at roughly $24,000. That cost falls directly on the Winona Police Department’s budget.

The eight WPD cameras were positioned at key highway entry and exit points throughout the city: near Highway 61 and Bundy Boulevard, Highway 43 and Homer Road, Highway 14 and Knapp Valley Drive, and Highway 61 and Highway 14. Two cameras were stationed at each location.

Flock Safety cameras are automated license plate readers that capture images of plates along with a vehicle’s make, model and color. Police use the technology to investigate crimes such as hit-and-runs and to locate missing persons. Camera data is owned by the police department and permanently deleted after 30 days.

The thefts are part of a broader national trend. Flock cameras have been vandalized and cut down in communities across the country. The technology has drawn criticism from civil liberties advocates who argue the cameras expand government surveillance and raise concerns about data being shared with third-party companies or federal agencies.

No suspects have been identified. The investigation is ongoing. Anyone with information is asked to contact the Winona Police Department.

▲

thomastjeffery 17 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> Police use the technology to investigate crimes such as hit-and-runs and to locate missing persons.

Disgusting copy. We all know that's not their primary function.

▲

SoftTalker 16 hours ago | parent [-]

I for one do believe that is their primary function. However good intentions don't justify violating our rights or accepting the (demonstrated) potential for abuse.

▲

thomastjeffery 16 hours ago | parent [-]

It might be their intended use (from a police department's perspective), but it's certainly not their intended function.

Flock collects these images, and uses them to train statistical models, and sells those models to police departments as a one-click crime solving solution.

That means that their primary function is to passively aggregate driver behavior into an automated judgement system, where the entire judicial system (designed to check and balance itself) is laundered away. Flock cameras exist to fundamentally replace police work, not to assist with it.

▲

SoftTalker 13 hours ago | parent [-]

You may be right but that's too conspiracy-theory for me. Most things are as they appear. Either way, I don't support it.

	▲	thomastjeffery 10 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		It's not a theory. It's literally what they market and sell.
	▲	ndsipa_pomu 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		To me, it appears that Flock cameras are a mass surveillance tool and that fits in fairly well with the US becoming more fascist (e.g. ICE agents murdering civilians). It also seems very on-brand for police departments to lie and obfuscate.

▲

goatlover 17 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Would be a shame if the public had no such information. /s

▲

lukan 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

LLM summary I suppose?

Who would include "Anyone with information is asked to contact the Winona Police Department." in a HN comment?

	▲	NDlurker 17 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That right there is the FA from the acronym RTFA
	▲	AngryData 17 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Looks like a direct copy from the news site.
	▲	fhdkweig 17 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		It isn't a summary. It is every word of the original article copied and pasted. I can understand doing that in something that is paywalled, but I didn't have any problems getting to the article.
	▲	17 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	17 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		[deleted]
	▲	metamet 17 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		...LLM summary? If you clicked the link and read the article, you'd quickly realize that they copy/pasted the article into a comment.