‘Preying on people’s fears.’ Fort Worth neighborhoods oppose new license plate readers

0
19
Cameras all over Fort Worth are recording us. Who’s watching, and should we worry?

Carol Peters and her neighbors in the Fort Worth neighborhood of West Meadowbrook do a good enough job of taking care of each other, in her opinion.

“We keep tabs on each other, as most neighbors do,” said Peters, president of the West Meadowbrook Neighborhood Association.

While most of the homes in her neighborhood are watched over by doorbell and other personal security cameras, Peters opposes recent marketing attempts to install license plate reading cameras over West Meadowbrook streets.

In recent weeks, she has received multiple emails from a sales representative of Flock Safety, the company contracted by the Fort Worth Police Department to run its license plate reading cameras and Community Camera Program. Critics have called out Flock Safety for its refusal to allow its technology to be subjected to independent third party testing.

“Burglaries, vehicle, and property theft are all on the rise in Texas and the perpetrators carrying out these crimes are not deterred by typical security measures like CCTV and intruder alarms,” the email read.

While that statement appears to ring true regarding vehicle thefts, according to the police department’s latest quarterly crime reports, crimes like burglary and stolen property decreased in 2023.

Peters accused Flock Safety of “preying on people’s fears about crime” to sell its “invasive” surveillance product.

“We all have those concerns, and we all worry about what’s happening in our neighborhood, but the best defense is to know each other, and to watch what’s going on,” she said. “And if you see something, say something. To me, that’s the best defense.”

Peters is not the only Fort Worth resident opposed to Flock Safety’s license plate readers in her neighborhood.

Daniel Haase, a resident of adjacent Central Meadowbrook, said he understands the use of the technology on busier thoroughfares like East Lancaster, but does not think they should be posted on residential streets.

“I just don’t think they’re appropriate for neighborhoods,” he said. “It’s a little intrusive.”

Just across Interstate 30 from the Meadowbrook neighborhoods, Linda Fulmer of White Lake Hills said her neighborhood has already gone through one failed experiment with cameras installed at its entrances over 10 years ago.

The cameras were not Flock Safety cameras. Residents set them up on their own and operated them out of homes near the entrances to White Lake Hills.

Expecting them to deter or help solve crimes turned out to be “a very naive assumption,” Fulmer said.

“What was subsequently learned was, number one, cars driving in and out of a neighborhood on a public street are not an indication that they participated in any crime. It doesn’t link the car to the crime scene, so it’s basically useless,” she said. “It’s also a bit of an invasion of privacy, because obviously, the people that live here come and go through those entrances.”

The cameras gave residents a false sense of security, Fulmer said, leading some to believe that they could leave their cars unlocked and not have any problems.

After a string of cars and homes being “ransacked,” it was discovered that the culprits were teenagers from the neighborhood apparently taking advantage of people being off their guard.

“Cameras at the entrance would not have captured them, because after they committed their little mischief, they went home,” she said.

Fulmer was also recently contacted by a Flock Safety sales representative.

“I sent her a response saying, you know, don’t bother us, this is stupid,” she said.

Marketing a false sense of insecurity

Surveillance and home security companies often try to market their products using a false sense of insecurity, according to Ken Shetter, president of local crime prevention nonprofit One Safe Place.

“I think it is more common that there is a more heightened sense of crime or violence than what actually occurs,” said Shetter, who also served as the mayor of Burleson from 2004 to 2020.

Still, people’s perception of safety can carry just as much weight as the realities of that safety.

“It’s not only important that people are safe, but it’s important that they feel safe, because the fear of violence really is just about as debilitating as violence itself,” he said.

While he acknowledges the benefits of license plate readers in the hands of public entities such as law enforcement agencies, he called marketing like Flock Safety’s “problematic.”

“That does raise some privacy concerns, it also raises concerns about how do you have any kind of guarantee that any particular person or group is qualified to employ or utilize the resource?” he said. “It’s important to deal in facts, and if you’re going to communicate some kind of danger or risk, it needs to be based on exactly what’s happening and not on some generalized fear of crime and violence, because that’s not really helpful.”

Flock Safety spokesperson Holly Beilin said in an email exchange that the kind of cameras marketed to Peters and others cited in this story had the option to be connected to the police department. She did not address residents’ concerns about the company’s sales tactics.

“Neighborhoods who purchase Flock cameras are able to choose whether they want to share camera access directly with their local PD, or not. It is entirely up to them,” she said.

The other option is more like a traditional security camera administered by residents and able to provide information to the police in case of incidents, she said. Residents would also have the option to put their license plates on a “Safe List” in order to not be read by the cameras.

Some Fort Worth neighborhoods welcome license plate readers

Not all Fort Worth neighborhoods oppose license plate readers. Leaders in the Las Vegas neighborhood attribute reductions in crime rates there to the presence of Flock Safety cameras over their streets.

“We absolutely support the technology,” said Paige Charbonnet, executive director of the Las Vegas Trail Revitalization Project, in an email exchange.

Crimes against persons in the area are down 13% and crimes against property are down 12% since 2020, according to Fort Worth city council member Michael Crain, whose district includes the Las Vegas Trail area.

Other crimes, such as drug offenses, gambling and prostitution, are up about 10%, he said, but he attributed the rise to increased enforcement thanks to the cameras.

“People change their behavior once they know they’re being watched, and the license plate technology is part of that, obviously,” he said.

Fort Worth drivers, however, can apparently assume they’re being watched by license plate readers anywhere in the city, as the police department said it does not divulge the locations of the more than 200 cameras that have been installed.

“We do not publicly release the locations of our cameras, as that would obviously arm criminals with the knowledge they need to avoid apprehension,” said Sgt. Jason Spencer in an email exchange.

But this expansion of constant surveillance is untenable for residents like Peters, of West Meadowbrook.

“We’re becoming a society where everyone surveils everyone else, and it’s just kind of getting to the point where you need to demand some privacy,” she said. “And this randomly surveilling license plates that travel through your neighborhood seems a little too much.”

Source link

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here