Posted on 08/21/2026 3:36:40 AM PDT by dennisw
0️⃣BlackBetty ⚓️
@BabyD1111229
Woo hoo! 👏🏻
A Texas constable just unplugged every Flock surveillance camera in his county and told the company to come get its garbage out of a free society.
Hood County Precinct 2 Constable John Shirley refused to wait for another empty study or corporate promise.
He and his team went out, disconnected the entire network of license-plate readers, covered them, and shut the system down cold.
“Today is a good day for the Freedom of the people of Hood County,” he posted.
He explained that he had finished the job of shutting down the county’s Flock cameras, which had been completely unplugged and covered.
Those devices were constantly scanning and recording regular people just going about their day, and that kind of permanent, warrantless tracking does not belong in a free society.
Every drive past one of those devices meant a person’s license plate was captured, time-stamped, and stored in a searchable database without any warrant or suspicion.
This created constant logging of ordinary Americans as they went to work, church, or the store.
Shirley made the principle plain when he stated that by unplugging and covering them they were making it clear that privacy is not optional and mass surveillance is not how things are done in Hood County.
He described the action as what limited government looks like and stressed that people there should not have to wonder if every trip they take is being logged and stored.
He expressed pride that this real win for the citizens had been accomplished.
He then delivered the final blow by telling Flock Safety Systems to come get their garbage out of his county.
This decisive stand comes at the exact moment reports have already exposed dozens of cases where officers abused the same network to stalk private citizens.
The company’s CEO admitted they could have done more earlier, yet the cameras keep spreading and turning daily life into permanent digital records that can be searched at will.
Once this infrastructure blankets the country, the temptation to misuse it never disappears.
Constable Shirley has proved that one determined official can still push back and win.
Hood County has drawn the line, leaving the question of whether the rest of America will follow before the watching becomes so normal that freedom itself feels like a memory.
Demand the same action in your county and share this widely, because the surveillance net is already tightening while one Texas lawman has just shown how to start cutting it.
Until you drive over to the next county where they still have them.
They are already being misused.
My state has a law that specifies they can *ONLY* be used for insurance verification, but law enforcement is constantly using them to solve crimes.
They check to see if a vehicle with the tag number they are interested in has driven past a flock camera, and they look at the people in the car whenever possible.
“”” And for the record, I consider “mandatory insurance” to be a human rights violation. The state should not be requiring patronage of private industries through law.
I think people should be required to assume all risk when they choose to drive on the public roads.”””
If you are willing to assume all risks when driving your car, then you need to prove to all other drivers on the road that you have the financial assets to assume all risks.
Flock came out and said their cameras were being used in ways they never intended. They changed their policies;
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/flock-ceo-apologizes-surveillance-technology-abused-company-changes/
Good for this Hood Cty Constable!!
... here’s a video of Darth Vader at public comment before the city council of San Diego, speaking in favor of Flock cameras.
I’m surprised it wasn’t Luke Skywalker (mushbrain Hamill).
I haven’t been wrongly arrested because my phone is tracking me.
No you don't. You have a fundamental right to use the public roadways. If people are afraid you might run into them and kill them, or worse, damage their car, then *THEY* should buy their own insurance to address their concerns, not deny to other people the right to use the public roadways.
And while we are on the topic, is your leg worth $100,000.00 to you? How about being paralyzed? Is that worth $100,000.00 to you? ($100,000.00 being the minimal insurance requirement, if I recall correctly.)
Most people will not accept $100,000.00 in exchange for losing a leg or being paralyzed, but that is the max they are going to get for people carrying minimal insurance.
So people are in fact risking their legs, their back, their eyesight, their face, their heads, and even their lives, just to drive on the public roadways.
If people are willing to risk death by driving on the public roads, why shouldn't they be willing to risk damage to their cars?
Requiring insurance is "prior restraint", and it should just be illegal.
Nahhhhh….no one would ever do that in a million years,,,,/s
“””($100,000.00 being the minimal insurance requirement, if I recall correctly.)
Most people will not accept $100,000.00 in exchange for losing a leg or being paralyzed, but that is the max they are going to get for people carrying minimal insurance.””””
I suggest you consult with a trial lawyer.
Yes, the maximum the insurance company will pay is $100,000.
However, if you, the driver causing the accident, also have $10 million in assets, I can assure you a trial lawyer will be more than happy to file a ‘pain and suffering’ lawsuit against you to remove a whole bunch of money from your deep pockets.
If you have that kind of money, you can buy insurance that provides a lot higher coverage.
If you are poor, you can't.
But that doesn't mean you shouldn't be allowed to use the public roads.
Consider Victor Sheymov who entered Eighth KGB Directorate in 1971. When he escaped U.S.S.R. in 1980, he directed KGB cipher communications worldwide, and as such was the highest-ranking intelligence official to defect.
Victor’s first obstacle for executing escape plans was contacting a KIO. He circumvented multi-level surveillance preventing foreign contacts. KGB tactics included agents posing as foreigners, permanent listening and optical devises in restaurants and hotels, and stationary surveillance by Seventh Directorate “traffic officers” or agents in covert stations with powerful optics.
Such elaborate, labor-intensive methods proved effective because U.S.S.R. restricted foreigner’s travels. Those from NATO countries received special attention, and qualified for up to sixteen surveillance teams, and for planted vehicle homing devices. Restricted travel meant direction-monitoring towers provided real time vehicle locations.
Just because you are not paranoid, doesn’t mean they aren’t out to get you. Victor escaped the Soviet Union, but where do we go?
I recall speed cameras were taken down because they were un constitutional. Why aren’t these things treated the same?
I remember the globalists bragging about how much CO2 reduction occurred during the lockdown. They even projected on how to control CO2 during times when production exceeded mandated levels.
Agreed.
Illegal immigrants use SNAP cards at grocery stores every single day. We know they are illegal. We know where they are and when they are there. Nothing happens.
They turn around and sell the items (along with stolen items) at makeshift “markets” in all of our inner cities. They don’t have licenses to do this. Nothing happens.
During the pandemic, how many people were arrested for simply refusing to wear a mask in a grocery store?
If they wanted to “catch criminals”, they have all of the information and tools to do so right now. That’s not what they want. They want to modify our behavior and have the tools to crack down on us when we refuse.
Anyone notice anything in the photo of Constable John?
The difference is glairing.
No 4-5 fake stars on the collar.
No shiney thing badge.
Just jeans, polo shirt with necessary IDs embordered in.
IE, a normal American Citizen, NOT some power drunk, in a dry cleaned uniform and a cameraman in tow.
.
There is a reason the apple on the back has a bite out of it.
Sick bastards.
Can anybody define the legal powers and jurisdictional responsibilities of a Constable in Texas?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.