Flock Safety CEO Garrett Langley pushed back against calls for a complete ban on his company's cameras, arguing that concerns about privacy should be considered alongside the potential public safety benefits of the technology.

Langley addressed the debate over Flock Safety's automated license plate reader cameras while acknowledging that Americans have legitimate concerns about privacy. He said he personally values privacy but argued that the discussion should not focus exclusively on limiting surveillance technology.

“I value my privacy,” Langley said, while emphasizing that the issue also involves public safety. He argued that treating privacy and safety as competing priorities can overlook the potential benefits of technology used by law enforcement.

Flock Safety's cameras are designed to capture information from vehicles, including license plates, and provide law enforcement agencies with data that can assist criminal investigations. Police departments have used the technology to help identify vehicles connected to reported crimes and locate suspects or missing people.

The technology has also faced growing scrutiny from privacy advocates and some local officials who have raised questions about how license plate data is collected, stored and accessed. Critics have argued that widespread deployment of cameras can create concerns about the tracking of people's movements even when they have not been accused of a crime.

Langley acknowledged the importance of those concerns but argued that completely eliminating the technology could also carry consequences for public safety. He said discussions about Flock cameras should account for both the privacy implications and the potential role the systems play in helping law enforcement respond to crime.

“I think when people talk about just one of these, privacy or safety, they're prioritizing the wrong thing,” Langley said.

The debate comes as communities across the country continue to consider how far law enforcement should be able to use surveillance technology. Local governments have taken different approaches to automated license plate readers, with some embracing the systems as investigative tools while others have imposed restrictions or questioned whether their benefits outweigh privacy concerns.

Langley's comments place Flock Safety at the center of that broader debate. The company argues that its technology can provide police with useful investigative information while still operating under policies governing access to and use of collected data.

The disagreement ultimately centers on how communities should balance individual privacy with law enforcement's ability to use technology in criminal investigations. While critics are calling for tighter limits on surveillance systems, Flock Safety's CEO is arguing that a blanket prohibition would ignore the potential safety benefits of the cameras.