Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, August 04, 2026

In Middletown and Bridgeport, police officials have pushed to contract a first-responder drone program they praise as a potentially life-saving tool. But residents of both cities took to their city halls ...

More

Alternate links: Google News | Twitter

LA should cut ties with Flock Safety. Cities across the country are canceling their Flock contracts over the risks its license plate readers pose to privacy, civil liberties, and immigrant communities. LAPD is doing the opposite: renegotiating a surveillance network that Angelenos never agreed to.

-- Nithya Raman (@nithyaforthecity.bsky.social) 7:30 PM · Jul 30, 2026

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the article ...

... Flock has drawn criticism in Connecticut about privacy concerns related to its public safety products, specifically its automated license plate readers. CT Insider reported in February that out-of-state agencies were searching local police departments' license plate data for immigration enforcement.

With the public eye on Flock's license plate camera technology, police officials have said the drone program is a vital tool that is often misunderstood.

So what, exactly, would the drones do?

"The drone's purpose is not surveillance, it's first response," Middletown Chief of Police Erik Costa told CT Insider on Wednesday. ...


#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-08-03 03:11 PM | Reply

@#1 ... The drone's purpose is not surveillance ...

Perhaps initially the drones won't be used for surveillance.

But what might occur when the state is full of these Flock drones?

Mission creep?



#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-08-03 03:12 PM | Reply

As always, follow the money.

Flock Safety was initially funded to the tune of $275 million by the Andreesen-Horowitz venture capital group, which has sought to secure itself as a primary financial and purveyor for start-ups looking to cash in on America's ever-growing security state apparatus. The group's primary leader is Ben Horowitz who just so happens to be the son of David Horowitz. David Horowitz is a longtime ultra-conservative "activist", editor of FrontPageMag and a Zionist Israel-first genocide supporter. Horowitz has long tracked and targeted pro-Palestinian voices on college campuses across America via his hideous "David Horowitz Freedom Center"

#3 | Posted by Nerfherder at 2026-08-03 11:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

@#1 ... The drone's purpose is not surveillance ...
Perhaps initially the drones won't be used for surveillance.
But what might occur when the state is full of these Flock drones?
Mission creep?
#2 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-08-03 03:12 PM

Why not the Israeli route and bug phones from the manufacturer? Re-code them? Backdoors? Explosives?

Imagine if most cell traffic is already routed through Israel.. how necessary would a "free phone" offer be?

If they get desperate they might tip their hand in such a manner to replace existing spy tech in our pockets, imo.

Phones are mind leashes.

Their perfect.

Drones are a distraction, imo. We won't see the actual spy technologies, imo.

#4 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2026-08-04 04:41 PM | Reply

A decade or so ago, once I realized that a frightening number of my older friends my age were dropping like flies, it also came with the realization that I no longer required a cell phone, so I replaced it with one of those old school wireless phones that tie to the internet router. So Big Bro can't really snoop on me, at least not through any hand-held device. Fast forward a couple years, and everybody and their mother now is putting up ring cameras and you have to know the moment you walk through the doors of any business, you're being recorded--probably from multiple angles. So let that knowledge inform you dog walkers that your unneighborly nonchalance when it comes to curbing and cleaning up after your pooch is probably being recorded.

#5 | Posted by dutch46 at 2026-08-04 05:42 PM | Reply

Can't have an Orwellian "1984" culture without Big Brother watching all, listening to all, frightening all.

#6 | Posted by Hughmass at 2026-08-05 06:38 AM | Reply

@#6 ... Can't have an Orwellian "1984" culture without Big Brother watching all, listening to all, frightening all. ...

Here in CT, there seems to be many concerned citizens showing up at town meetings to voice their disapproval of the Flock surveillance of their town.

To the point that is appears to now be a state-level concern ...

State lawmakers urge Connecticut towns, cities to pause installations of Flock Safety cameras
www.wtnh.com

... As the conversation around Flock Safety cameras start to stir in Connecticut, some state lawmakers are now looking to assess its usage amid concerns of data privacy.

A handful of towns and cities across the state are either reconsidering or moving forward with adopting contracts with the surveillance company.

"We passed a law about [the cameras] being on public property in certain parameters around that. Now they're on private property, there are drones," Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff (D-Norwalk) said. "The issue is, they just continue to proliferate and they keep springing up like dandelions in the spring."
What are Flock cameras? How you can find them in Connecticut

Duff is joining Sen. James Maroney (D-Milford) to push for a pause on the cameras. They are urging towns and cities across the state to stop any new Flock cameras from being installed.

The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection is also being asked to take a survey of how many cameras there are across the state, to assess how far the tech has spread.

Flock has previously stated it does not sell its data to third parties, and that data collected is owned and controlled by customers themselves.

"The debate of privacy and safety is an important one and at Flock we believe they can coexhist," Flock CEO Garrett Langley said.

Langley says he praises the push from Connecticut's lawmakers for safeguards, including recent legislation to limit data sharing only with neighboring states.

"We have codified that into the product," Langley said. "It's a technical limitation now, and so we applaud them for making that decision ... and large support efforts by the lawmakers to make it clear what is and what is not permissible in the state of Connecticut." ...



#7 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-08-05 08:41 PM | Reply

@#7 ... "The debate of privacy and safety is an important one and at Flock we believe they can coexhist," Flock CEO Garrett Langley said. ...

Yeah that is what Flock is currently saying to get all the cameras installed.

What may be on the horizon, though?

#8 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-08-05 08:43 PM | Reply

@#7 ... "The issue is, they just continue to proliferate and they keep springing up like dandelions in the spring." ...

A good analogy.



#9 | Posted by LampLighter at 2026-08-05 09:10 PM | Reply

What freedom loving person could object to surveillance drones?

#10 | Posted by snoofy at 2026-08-05 09:25 PM | Reply

The following HTML tags are allowed in comments: a href, b, i, p, br, ul, ol, li and blockquote. Others will be stripped out. Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Anyone can join this site and make comments. To post this comment, you must sign it with your Drudge Retort username. If you can't remember your username or password, use the lost password form to request it.
Username:
Password:

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy

Drudge Retort