The discussion around Flock Safety’s Automated License Plate Readers continues across the country and here in West Virginia over how we manage rapidly evolving technology that has the potential to solve and prevent crime but also has the potential to be abused and erode our right to privacy.
Many discussions in forums such as Metronews Talkline or conversations among members of local city councils or county commissions have been constructive and have addressed real concerns about protections guaranteed under the US Constitution.
Questions about data retention and best practices to prevent misuse of that information are warranted and need to take place so we can reach some sort of societal consensus on how we’ll integrate the rapidly evolving and invasive world of AI into public safety and policing.
Then, there is what happened last week at the Monongalia County Commission meeting.
Residents opposed to the use of the 20 ALPRs deployed by the Monongalia County Sheriff’s Department have used the public portion of meetings to express that displeasure. However, actual concerns with the use of the cameras were overshadowed by comments that more closely resembled a three-year-old’s temper tantrum.
When one speaker, well-known in the Morgantown area for her social justice fights, refused to follow long-established meeting rules for the public comment portion of the meeting, she was told she would have to leave. She refused, responding that she would have to be dragged out. When a bailiff started to escort her out, she exclaimed: “Get your hands off me!”
That was followed by shouting, and for a moment, a county commission meeting turned into a three-ring circus.
She eventually left, was never handcuffed, and faced no charges for the shenanigans.
Without any context, social media influencers picked up on the clip from the Monongalia County Commission meeting and reposted it, claiming it was an example of a tyrannical local government infringing on someone’s constitutional rights.
While the episode may have created a momentary “viral moment,” the attention on such antics shifts the focus from people’s legitimate concerns about their privacy and use of personal data, only serving to muddy the waters even further, making it more difficult for elected officials to reach any sort of consensus on how to manage the controversial tool.
The behavior serves no purpose.
In reality, it is an adult throwing a toddler’s temper tantrum.
And that is your right under the First Amendment. Just don’t be surprised when you’re treated accordingly.
Meanwhile, the adults will continue to have meaningful conversations and will find a reasonable answer to a very polarizing question.