Fusion Centers Track Anti-Flock Activists on TikTok and Instagram

Fusion centers across the U.S. have turned their gaze on citizens who speak out against automated license plate readers. These intelligence hubs, designed to share threat information between local, state and federal agencies, now monitor social media posts critical of Flock Safety’s surveillance cameras. The shift reveals a growing tension between public pushback and law enforcement’s embrace of expansive tracking tools.

Documents obtained through public records requests paint a clear picture. Officials warn officers to ramp up patrols near camera sites. They flag specific Instagram accounts posting videos of damaged equipment. And they link political organizing against mass surveillance to isolated acts of vandalism. The reports, marked sensitive for law enforcement eyes only, circulate widely among police departments.

Jason Koebler broke the story for 404 Media on August 12, 2026. His reporting draws on fresh intelligence bulletins from multiple fusion centers. One from Colorado notes “people have begun utilizing the app to locate and then destroy or disable the ALPRs.” It singles out an Instagram user called Nomark.Project for daily videos of disabling cameras. Comments cheer the effort. Another bulletin from Wisconsin via a Florida center highlights “extensive and ongoing chatter on social media platforms such as Facebook and TikTok” about interfering with the devices.

These bulletins don’t stop at observation. They urge vigilance. “Increase patrols around ALPR.” Stay alert for suspicious activity near camera poles. The language blurs lines. It ties DeFlock, a mapping project started in 2024, to both lawful protests and property damage. Yet the project’s creator insists his work stays within civic bounds.

Will Freeman launched DeFlock as an open-source effort to map license plate readers nationwide. 404 Media covered its rapid growth earlier. Freeman told Koebler the project never advocated destruction. “DeFlock has never called for disabling cameras or covering license plates, contrary to what recent law enforcement bulletins claim,” he said. Over two years it helped cancel more than 100 contracts through petitions, town halls and outreach. Some copycat accounts, he added, misused the name without approval.

The National Week of Action Against Automated License Plate Readers runs August 16-22. Organizers plan meetings, marches and education sessions in cities from Florida to Idaho. Fusion center reports list participating locations. They note rising online instructions for sabotage. One July 2026 bulletin from North Florida describes a former Flock technician’s video on Instagram. The user, Thepatrioticgoy, explains how to disable units while avoiding detection. Seven incidents of damaged cameras in the state follow in the document.

Dan Boguslaw first exposed fusion center interest in the movement. His Substack report detailed early warnings about “calls for vandalism to ALPRs nationwide.” Koebler’s follow-up expands the scope. He obtained bulletins from Colorado, Wisconsin, New Jersey, Central Florida and North Florida centers. One summary of the 404 Media article even reached an FBI headquarters listserv. The New Jersey document went to a nationwide ALPR working group. Surveillance of surveillance critics now spans the country.

Flock Safety itself condemns the damage. A spokesperson told 404 Media that “Damaging public safety equipment is illegal and puts communities at risk.” The company reports few vandalism cases overall. When they occur, it cooperates with police. Yet the firm’s rapid expansion fuels the backlash. Thousands of its cameras now dot streets, often installed with little public notice. They feed data into vast networks. Retention policies have tightened in some places, but privacy advocates still see overreach.

Recent coverage shows the debate spreading. The New York Post reported three days ago on a surprising alliance. Democrats and Republicans join forces against the cameras. Brian McKellar, who formed DeFlock Idaho, described the technology as constant documentation. “It reminds me of these sci-fi AI, like, the government’s-watching-you kind of movies,” he told the paper. Residents in his town echo the sentiment. They want the Wild West feel back, free from perpetual tracking.

Public sentiment boils over on platforms. TikTok and Instagram videos rack up views. Some show poles cut down. Others document community meetings. Fusion centers treat both as signals. One bulletin mentions a traffic stop where officers found a device that could locate cameras. The driver reportedly wrote software to scan for vulnerabilities and shared it online. Such cases feed the narrative that dissent equals threat.

Critics argue this monitoring chills speech. Activists exercise First Amendment rights when they petition officials or host events. Yet intelligence reports lump them with vandals. Neo-Nazi groups briefly discussed targeting cameras, one Colorado document notes, but momentum faded fast with no evidence of action. The inclusion hints at how authorities stretch connections.

Freeman changed DeFlock’s website language to sound less alarmist. It now reads as a neutral mapping tool rather than a battle cry. Still, anger simmers. People discover cameras in their neighborhoods after the fact. No debate preceded installation in many towns. That secrecy breeds distrust. And when videos of smashed units go viral, the cycle accelerates. More patrols. More bulletins. More posts.

Law enforcement defends the cameras as crime-fighting assets. They help solve hits and runs, locate suspects, track stolen vehicles. Flock claims high clearance rates in partner cities. Yet the scale raises questions. One network can query millions of plates daily. Data flows to private firms and agencies alike. Retention was once 30 days; some locales cut it to a week. The change came after pressure. It hasn’t quieted opponents.

The fusion center documents obtained by Koebler and Boguslaw mark a new phase. Government now watches the watchers’ watchers. Accounts like Nomark.Project gain followers for their direct action. Others focus on policy change. Both appear in briefings. Officials seem wary of any momentum that could lead to widespread decommissioning.

As the Week of Action begins today, expect fresh reports. Local events in over a dozen cities will test how police respond. Will they treat organizers as partners in dialogue or subjects of interest? Early signs point to the latter. Increased patrols suggest preparation for conflict rather than conversation.

This episode exposes cracks in the surveillance state. Citizens armed with phones and apps push back against corporate-government partnerships. They map the mappers. They share tactics. And authorities respond by monitoring the mappers. The loop feels self-reinforcing. Each side sees the other as the real danger.

Technology outpaced policy years ago. ALPR networks grew quietly. Public awareness lagged. Now that awareness spreads on social media, the response is surveillance of the spreaders. Fusion centers, born after 9/11 to combat terrorism, increasingly focus on domestic dissent over license plate readers. The pivot deserves scrutiny.

Freeman remains optimistic about civic routes. Petitions work. Votes work. Education works. Vandalism, he says, distracts. Yet the viral clips keep coming. A former insider’s tutorial carries weight. Damage reports tick upward in Florida and elsewhere. Each feeds the next bulletin.

Koebler’s piece improves on prior coverage by embedding multiple primary documents and quoting Freeman directly. It connects dots across states. Earlier stories captured the movement’s birth. This one shows institutional reaction. The government isn’t just aware. It tracks hashtags, usernames, planned dates. It briefs street officers. The monitoring itself becomes the story.

Broader implications stretch beyond one company. Other surveillance contractors watch. Cities weigh contract renewals. Privacy groups file suits. And on TikTok, the videos roll. Short clips of sawed poles. Longer explainers on data privacy. The algorithm amplifies both. Fusion centers log it all.

So here we stand. A loose network of activists versus entrenched tech and law enforcement interests. One side maps cameras. The other maps the mappers. Tension builds as the week unfolds. Expect more documents to surface. More accounts to gain notice. The conflict over who watches whom shows no sign of fading.