I believe the folks cutting down Flock cameras and voting out reps who won't have them removed are well within their rights. Fundamentally, Flock Safety is incompatible with US constitutional rights, their enterprise value can drain slowly, or quickly. We're just arguing time horizon.

Flock Camera CEO Asks Americans to “Compromise” on Privacy After Growing Backlash - https://www.yahoo.com/news/us/articles/flock-camera-ceo-asks... - August 27th, 2026

Flock CEO calls for ‘compromise’ as surveillance company faces growing backlash - https://techcrunch.com/2026/08/23/flock-ceo-calls-for-compro... - August 23rd, 2026

Flock Safety CEO calls for national 'compromise' amid camera sabotage and public revolt - https://www.foxnews.com/media/flock-safety-ceo-calls-nationa... - August 22nd, 2026

> If you want violence, you better be prepared for it. You just can't complain when someone doesn't like what you are doing and comes right to your door.

I don't condone violence in this context, and besides perhaps a few individuals (humans are tricky), I haven't seen anyone else loudly or overtly calling for it (provide sources if I am wrong). My assumption is his address is being shared to demonstrate the asymmetry and hypocrisy. "If you have nothing to hide" argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nothing_to_hide_argument

(but you know, its the usual authoritarian tech bro "I wanna get rich and have control while the plebs get stuck with the harm and externalities" story)

as always it entirely depends on context. rationality is out the door when tbe power is out of your hands. its pretty clear flock wont take your criticism seriously

Our founding fathers addressed this: "What country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two?

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."

The CEO of a company that spies on people, and now detects signals from your phone to connect the car to a driver, got scared and had Google blur his house. That is the height of hypocrisy. His home address is also public information, available from the City Clerks office for free. People won't need to find the exact address, just look for the only blurred house on his street. It's all utterly ridiculous. Clearly the citizens of the USA do not want flock in their communities so the CEO of the company isn't going to be popular, but he could fix that by removing flock from the communities that ban it.

CEOs aren't just people. They can have fun dealing with it :)

Legislation guardrails around surveillance technology are a necessary component to defend against future corporate surveillance apparatus establishment and operation, as this surveillance could take many forms (video, audio, geolocation, RF signatures, etc). Flock and Axon today, whatever unsavory folks come along in the future.

“Capitalism is the extraordinary belief that the nastiest of men for the nastiest of motives will somehow work together for the benefit of all.” —- John Maynard Keynes

Guardrails because we cannot trust the human.

My money would be on Axon. They at least have a claim to the "hold police accountable" angle with bodycams and less-lethal weapons. Compared with Flock's "we'll watch you and what're you gonna do about it"

>they will absolutely be legalized on some party line vote in the middle of the night.

Or they'll be legalized piecemeal and you'll get sneered at by the useful idiots for opposing each incremental step based on principal.