What Flock Safety Cameras Can And Can't Do In Central Texas

Security cameras have been a thing for a while, but Flock Cameras in Central Texas are getting all kinds of hate.

Rising Flock Camera Vandalism Triggers Felony Charges

Law enforcement agencies in Central Texas are standing behind their automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems as multiple people face prosecution for damaging Flock Safety cameras in Bell and McLennan counties. Police say just because you hate them doesn't mean you can destroy them.

Arrests Following Flock Camera Damage in Hewitt

A recent incident in Hewitt shows just how serious damaging a flock camera can be. According to KCEN, police arrested 20-year-old Ryne Tanner on July 30 following the vandalism of a camera installed at Hewitt Park.

The Suspect Is Found By Using Flock

To protect his privacy by destroying a camera, Tanner's name and face have been publicized for all the world to see as he is charged with third-degree felony electronic access interference alongside criminal mischief. According to Hewitt Police Chief Jim McGrath, neighboring cameras near the park and a local Walmart captured images of the suspect and his vehicle, leading to his arrest.

What Are Flock Cameras?

Flock cameras are automated license plate reader (ALPR) systems made by Flock Safety. Police departments use them to capture vehicle license plates and descriptive details like make, model, color, and other identifying traits like bumperstickers. Law enforcement can also use Flock's searchable cloud database to solve crimes.

How the Technology Works

The issue many have with the Flock cameras is how easy it is to go from crime investigation to constant surveillance. Police officials say the automated license plate readers serve as quick investigative tools rather than tools for continuous public surveillance.

A Law Enforcement Description of Flock Cameras

Police say the cameras are limited in what they can do:

Focused Data Collection: The cameras capture still images of license plates and vehicle characteristics as cars pass specific points; they do not maintain continuous live video feeds of drivers.

No Facial Recognition: Systems do not utilize facial recognition

Evidentiary Limitations: Lt. Gary Smith of the Temple Police Department clarified that a camera "hit" merely offers a lead to corroborate witness statements or spot crime trends. He says it does not constitute standalone probable cause for an arrest.

Strict Policy Boundaries: Data access is restricted solely to criminal investigations and cannot be used for immigration enforcement, personal reasons, or harassment.

Impact on Local Crime Rates

In Temple, police attribute a measurable decline in vehicle-related offenses to the strategic deployment of the camera network:

Temple Motor Vehicle Crime Statistics (2024–2026)

Vehicle Thefts Reported:
2024: 344 cases
2025: 214 cases (-38% from 2024)
Through July 2026: 59 cases (-62% compared to same period in 2025)

Thefts from Motor Vehicles:
2024: 369 cases
2025: 210 cases (-43% from 2024)
Through July 2026: 79 cases (-34% compared to same period in 2025)

Addressing Privacy Concerns and Vandalism

Despite police assurances, some local residents are not buying it, pointing out the ever-increasing number of cameras in Central Texas. Officials say Central Texans should not to rely on what they read on social media. Both the Temple and Hewitt police departments conduct routine system audits and offer open-door demonstrations at their police stations to show residents precisely how data is gathered and protected.

Flock Abuse= Possible Felony

Law enforcement wants area residents to understand that damaging camera equipment constitutes criminal mischief under Texas law, carrying potential Class A misdemeanor or felony convictions. Chief McGrath and Lt. Smith advise anyone with privacy concerns to speak with city leaders or police administration rather than risking a permanent criminal record by destroying public property.