Oakland County's Surveillance Drone Problem

The recent political turmoil behind the approval of a Flock drone pilot program meant to enhance law enforcement in Oakland County has resulted in a potential recall of Oakland County Commissioner Dave Woodward.

Flock drones represent a major technological leap forward. Unlike the drones most public and private sector agencies use for various tasks, these newer platforms contain cameras and software specifically designed for surveillance and data collection.

Described as semi-autonomous deployment devices meant to aid local, state, and federal law enforcement, Flock drones have facial-recognition and plate-reading capabilities.

Most cities in Metro Detroit, including Livonia, Westland, Redford, and Northville, already have drone programs in place and are using them to help first responders. Livonia and Westland specifically deploy drones to assist firefighters and police dealing with dangerous situations so arriving officers and firefighters have a birds-eye view of the area they entering. The consensus is they will benefit safety, response time, and problem solving.

Our managerial class thinks adopting new technology is essential, but this next push is causing brains to burst.

Media reporting on this issue has been cautiously tepid, framing outcry as a civil liberty issue, which in fact it is. But the true force behind halting the deployment of Flock drones isn’t about real privacy concerns of residents; it’s the idea that such advanced technology could be used to locate and capture illegals.

Ferndale toyed with the idea of using Flock cameras on a trial basis and ultimately ended the program based on fears that the drone would cause illegals residing or working in the area to live in fear.

But that isn’t the only reason the progressives are bent out of shape on the issue. Flock’s capabilities are uniquely designed as a counter measure against property crime, and communities in Metro Detroit have been under considerable pressure by activists to stop policing such crime.

Further igniting controversy around the issue are the messaging and retailing from Flock representatives. Last year, Brett Kanda, the director of the Drone First responder sales at Flock, said, “Our mission is to end crime in the United States…Those (Drones) are the things that make people feel safer in their communities. Adopting new technology is an important part of a safe city concept that we in the U.S. come to overlook and expect.”

Oakland County Sheriff Mike Bouchard is a strong supporter of the Flock drone program and has pushed back at the notion the platform is a surveillance program. He’s played down concerns, stating: “The misinformation is this is a surveillance program and it is not. It’s an existing program which responds to calls. It’s not a surveillance program; it’s a drone-first responder program.”

Fair enough, but setting aside the political intrigue, there is cause for concern, and the civil liberty issues are worth arguing over for those wondering what new style of policing awaits us.

Drones have been essential in the war in Ukraine and elsewhere, giving some level of credence to the paranoia that might be developing among the public. Video clips of drones flying close to targets and exploding are ubiquitous on social media, which might be exciting for drone manufacturers at arms-dealer conventions, but causes the hair on the backs of the necks of normal Americans to stand straight up.

While the progressive activists and liberal county officials are caught in a pickle on this issue, the rest of us normal folk have to understand the pros and cons to this new level of heightened security, because the genie is out of the bottle and isn’t going back in.

Kanda has stated that within five years half the police departments in American will be using Flock drones as a force multiplier for first response and as crime deterrents, so questions require answers.

What data will be collected and how will it be used? Sheriff Bouchard has stated publicly that the Oakland County Sheriff’s department will be in control of the drones and storing data recorded by them.

But when ending the partnership with Flock, Ferndale cited the possibility the data they collected from their cameras was accessed by out-of-state agencies, without stating who or why.

Autonomy also comes into question. Kanda has also publicly divulged that the next step in the evolution of Flock drones is for autonomous capability allowing law enforcement to focus on police work while the drones fly themselves.

That’s a “Terminator 2: Judgement Day” prospect. Instead of a neighborhood, are we looking at an open-air prison where all of our daily movements are being watched and tracked? Is the next step after that to dress the drones with weapons platforms? I’ve seen too many science-fiction films not know what comes next in that scenario.

But my inner sci-fi nerd admittedly looks forward to hyper-tech advancement, nonetheless, even as the notion of an AI-controlled T-800 Terminator looms on the horizon.

How will average Michigan residents respond to the entrance of drones as a watchful protector looming overhead like the Eye of Sauron?

Probably with a shrug.