At least 14 officers misused ALPR tools for romantic stalking. Most cases surfaced only after victims reported odd behavior. Some fired officers still hold certification for future police work. Communities across the United States are taking a harder look at automated license plate readers, especially systems from Flock Safety, and stories like this are a big reason why. A review from the Institute for Justice identified at least 14 cases where law enforcement officers used these tools to track romantic partners, former partners, or even strangers they were interested in. If ALPR systems continue to expand, that figure has nowhere to go but way up. Those 14 examples are important, but they are not the full story. In most of these situations, the misuse was not caught by good cops calling out the bad apples, internal systems, or audits. Instead, it came to light because the victims noticed unusual patterns and reported it. That raises a larger question about how often this kind of access is being used improperly without ever being detected. Read: Flock Traffic Cameras Track Everything, Except The Cops Misusing Them In nearly every case, the outcome followed a familiar pattern. Officers were charged, resigned, or were terminated by their departments. On paper, that suggests accountability. But it does not necessarily close the loop. Losing a job in law enforcement does not automatically mean losing certification. In many states, certification is handled separately from employment and requires its own process to revoke. That process can take time and does not always lead to a permanent ban from policing. Photo Flock Safety So while it is true that none of the officers involved are still working for the departments where the misconduct occurred, there is no public record confirming whether they lost their certification. Without that step, it is possible for an officer to seek employment at another agency. This entire situation demonstrates the flaw with the argument that camera systems like this and their proponents often cite: if you have nothing to hide, then why worry about this type of surveillance? Because the people entrusted with its lawful use will at times misuse that power. What’s that age-old statement about power and corruption? It’s certainly not an endorsement that those with power avoid corruption. If anything, this case proves the opposite.