What the Flock? Knoxville mayor explains the dark truth about Flock cameras: ‘Not your grandma's license plate readers’



Flock cameras — the automated license plate readers that photograph passing vehicles to capture their license plates, make, model, color, and other details, turning them into searchable records — are popping up all over the country. Proponents argue that they help solve crime and keep Americans safe, but is that actually true?

According to Glenn Jacobs, mayor of Knox County, Tennessee, the answer is no. He argues that Flock cameras actually endanger Americans by putting them under constant surveillance, giving the government a complete record of every citizen’s movements.

On this episode of “Kibbe on Liberty,” Matt Kibbe sits down with Jacobs to discuss why he believes Flock cameras are a dire threat to privacy and the Fourth Amendment.

“The more I've researched [Flock cameras], the more I dislike them and consider them a very dire threat to our privacy and to the protections guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment,” says Jacobs.

Kibbe, calling Flock cameras “Orwellian,” is concerned that such surveillance will turn America into China 2.0.

“How is this any different than kind of a Chinese surveillance system?” he asks.

Jacobs indicates that it’s not all that different. Flock cameras, he explains, are marketed as license plate readers, but “they do a lot more than that.”

“With the Flock system, it is literally harvesting data. Every car that goes by, it pulls their license plate, but it also uses AI to develop a vehicle footprint,” he says.

“So it's your license plate, but also make, model, color, distinguishing features, roof racks, bumper stickers, all these different things that then go into a database and remain there for 30 days or more, depending on the policy of that particular agency. Then it can be searched through without a warrant for whatever,” he continues.

The lack of established parameters around Flock cameras also gives Jacobs serious pause.

“In Tennessee there's no state rules about how this can be used, and there's no federal guidelines either, so what's happened is this technology has gone out there and it's — until now, it's kind of flown under the radar,” he says.

Then there’s public opinion to consider. As Americans find out more and more about Flock cameras, the opposition has only grown.

“These things are not popular at all, and the more people learn about them, the more they literally hate them,” says Jacobs.

For example, it’s coming out that Flock cameras can gather enough data to form “a pattern of your movements.”

Jacobs illustrates the danger of such power with a hypothetical.

“They could say, you know, Glenn goes to the gun range at least once a week, twice on Sundays. If this happened during COVID, you know, he goes to anti-COVID meetings and rallies. All of a sudden they have a profile on me,” he says.

“No, we do not have an expectation of privacy when we're in public places and on public roads, but the Supreme Court has ruled that without a warrant, your movements can't be tracked like that. They ruled that in Carpenter v. United States in 2018,” he continues, predicting that it’s a matter of time before the Supreme Court will “squash” Flock cameras.

“But in the meantime, it's just important that people are aware that these are not your grandma's license plate readers. These are something much much different,” he warns.

To hear more, watch the episode above.

Want more from Matt Kibbe?

To enjoy more of Matt's liberty-defending stance as he gets in the face of the fake news establishment, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

Will America need a Caesar?



Earlier this month, San Francisco’s Hamilton Society held a debate on a question that would have sounded absurd not long ago: Does America need a Caesar?

Older Americans may scoff. Younger politically engaged Americans are less likely to. Many came of age after 9/11 amid corruption, institutional drift, and visible decline. Even a presidency that has slowed the Biden-era collapse has not repaired the deeper sense that the system no longer works.

America needs a path out of cybernetic collapse that does not end in machine rule or technologically enhanced autocracy.

From that premise, the temptation follows: If everything is broken, perhaps history’s oldest emergency remedy deserves a second look.

But one does not simply “have a Caesar.” Critics who dismiss the whole discussion as live-action role-playing or strongman wish-casting have a point. A generation trained to think and talk rather than act will naturally produce elaborate theories of action it has never practiced.

The Hamilton Society debate captured that tension. The motion that America needs a Caesar failed, 56% to 44%, though the pro-Caesar side gained five points after the arguments. I had agreed to argue against the motion before a scheduling conflict kept me away.

Nervous breakdown

That case is easy enough to make today. America does not need a Caesar right now. The disturbing question is whether conditions could change until it does.

The danger lies in those two little words: right now.

Right now, America is entering a period of radical uncertainty, driven in part by artificial intelligence. My feed is filling with nervous remarks from people working at the edge of the AI industry. Their concern confirms two things: Our near-term future remains unwritten, and our capacity to make plans is beginning to break down.

The threat is not only a race toward recursively self-improving intelligence. It is also the recursive destruction of our ability to understand what is happening while our political order comes apart.

RELATED: The path to America-first AI

yunping liang/iStock/Getty Images

The federal government faces a brutal dilemma. Its legitimacy depends partly on maintaining American strategic dominance. As AI advances, can Washington preserve that dominance without claiming the most powerful systems for itself and using them at its discretion?

Maintaining such an edge would not mean controlling only today’s strongest models. It would mean controlling tomorrow’s, then the next day’s, forever. The ultimate AI weapon is not one machine. It is the power to weaponize anything at any scale, from the planetary to the personal.

The technocratic answer is more cybernetics: tighter governance through self-improving systems of monitoring, prediction, and control. But we should be preparing for cybernetics itself to fail under the pressure of the moment.

Diminishing options

When a system can no longer govern itself, societies reach for familiar exits.

One is withdrawal: Head for the hills, build resilient communities, and live beyond the failing machinery. Some people should do exactly that. But if escape becomes a mass impulse, it stops being resilience and becomes flight. Poorly prepared internal refugees would remain trapped inside the same collapsing country.

A second option is spiritual authority. In periods of corruption, societies often turn to their holiest figures. America, however, is ill-equipped for that solution. Our churches are divided, many religious leaders suffer their own crisis of trust, and our constitutional order does not provide for theocracy.

That leaves the third option: one man entrusted with enough power to impose order on the people and, now, their machines. A ruler believed strong enough to bear the burden of writing a new law for a broken society.

In other words: Caesar.

What would have to happen before Americans not only wanted such a figure but believed they needed him? A broad majority would have to conclude that without one, the country would collapse and Americans would cease to be recognizably American.

RELATED: The question of the AI age: How much humanism is too much?

Moor Studio/iStock/Getty Images

The failure of the American experiment would leave us unable to agree on what regime should replace it. We might not even know what sort of people we had become. Under those conditions, an all-powerful AI could offer to decide for us.

If the choice appeared to be submission to the machine or submission to a man who promised to preserve both our humanity and our national identity, Caesar would suddenly look pretty attractive.

A civilization, if we can keep it

Here is the catch: Every historical Caesar has been pagan or Christian, and Christian Caesars ruled empires. America has imperial features, but it is not the kind of civilization likely to produce a Christian emperor. The Christian model for the ruler of one nation is the king, not the Caesar who governs many peoples.

That leaves the more plausible American outcome: a pagan Caesar.

Few Americans worship the classical gods. Politically, however, pagan gods were the gods of the regime — powers embodied by the city, the state, and ultimately the ruler. Caesar did not merely govern beneath them. He could become one of them.

Artificial intelligence now offers a lone ruler something no ancient emperor possessed: the prospect of near-divine control over information, movement, behavior, and even human cognition. AI could restore the oldest pagan political dream — the “gods of the city” made operational.

That is the point of departure for “Pagan.ai,” my essay in the new issue of Frontier.

America needs a path out of cybernetic collapse that does not end in civil anarchy or cyber theocracy. If we don’t like the Caesar we may someday believe we need, we should begin now to repair the conditions that would make him possible.

The best way to avoid Caesar is not to mock the question. It is to build a country that never has to ask it.

Let Your Kids Grow Up Without A Homing Signal

By constant monitoring, we’re not just giving up freedom for temporary safety, we’re raising kids to think the surveillance state is normal.

From Jerusalem, a prayer for America



Every Fourth of July, I think about the country where I was born — a nation built on faith, courage, and the belief that every person is created in the image of God.

Independence Day is about fireworks, parades, and time with family. But it is also a reminder of the miracle of America and the values that have shaped this nation for 250 years.

From Jerusalem to every corner of the United States, may this Independence Day be a celebration of gratitude, unity, and hope.

As an American-Israeli, this holiday carries special meaning for me.

I grew up in the United States, where freedom is woven into daily life. Today, I raise my children in Israel, a country whose very existence is a miracle of biblical proportions. Each year on July 4, I am reminded how blessed I am to belong to two nations rooted in faith, resilience, and hope.

America and Israel are different in many ways, but their foundations are strikingly similar.

Both nations were built by people who believed in something greater than themselves. They trusted God, longed for freedom, and sacrificed for a better future.

America’s founders risked everything to establish a nation where liberty could flourish. Israel’s founders rebuilt a homeland after 2,000 years of exile, guided by ancient promises and unshakable faith.

Both nations understand that freedom is never guaranteed. It must be protected, nurtured, and passed to the next generation.

And both nations know that a country’s greatest strength lies not in its power, but in its values.

On Independence Day, I often think about the men and women who have served in the U.S. military — those who fought in World War II to defeat evil, those who stood against tyranny in the decades that followed, and those who continue to defend freedom around the world.

As a Jewish woman, I will never forget that American soldiers helped liberate the concentration camps. They brought hope to a world drowning in darkness. They saved lives — not only the lives of Jews in Europe, but the lives of my own family members.

Both my grandfather and my father-in-law survived the Holocaust, thanks in no small part to the sacrifice of American service members. Their courage is part of the reason the Jewish people are alive today.

As an Israeli, I see that same spirit of courage in the young men and women who serve in the Israel Defense Forces.

America and Israel both understand the cost of freedom. Both nations honor those who protect it. And both nations know that not every hero comes home.

Living as both an American and an Israeli has taught me that miracles are not only ancient. They are happening right now.

RELATED: America turns 250 with a broken heart

Erik McGregor/LightRocket/Getty Images

America is a miracle: a nation founded on biblical values, where people of every background can pursue their God-given purpose.

Israel is a miracle: a nation reborn from ashes, thriving against all odds, and standing as a beacon of hope in a troubled region.

To belong to both is a privilege I thank God for every day.

As America approaches its 250th anniversary, this Independence Day feels especially meaningful. It is a moment to reflect on the values that built this nation — faith, freedom, courage, unity — and to rededicate ourselves to living them.

These are the same values that sustain Israel. The same values that bind Christians and Jews together. The same values that light the way forward in uncertain times.

This Fourth of July, my prayer is simple:

May God bless America with peace and protection. May He strengthen the families who build this nation every day. May He guide its leaders with wisdom and humility. And may He remind all of us that freedom is both a gift and a responsibility.

From Jerusalem to every corner of the United States, may this Independence Day be a celebration of gratitude, unity, and hope.

Happy Fourth, America.

America Has 37 Years Left — Unless We Make This Change | Seth Gruber | Ep 1356
play icon

America Has 37 Years Left — Unless We Make This Change | Seth Gruber | Ep 1356

America Has 37 Years Left — Unless We Make This Change | Seth Gruber | Ep 1356
play icon

America Has 37 Years Left — Unless We Make This Change | Seth Gruber | Ep 1356

Afroman turns police raid into a win: ‘Blessing in disguise’ after free speech victory



Last month, American rapper Afroman (real name Joseph Edgar Foreman) won a defamation lawsuit against Ohio sheriff’s deputies who raided his home in 2022. Acting on a tip about drugs and kidnapping, the deputies kicked down his door with guns drawn, ransacked the house, and seized some cash — all captured on his home security cameras.

No drugs or evidence was found, and no charges were filed. Afroman then turned the raid footage into viral parody videos, including the hit “Lemon Pound Cake,” which prompted the deputies to sue him for defamation. On March 18, an Ohio jury ruled in his favor on the grounds of free speech.

Now he joins Matt Kibbe, BlazeTV host of “Kibbe on Liberty” to discuss the raid, the lawsuit, and what the victory means for free speech in America.

Afroman, who’s currently on tour, says that the incident with the Ohio deputies has turned out to be “a blessing in disguise,” as people have been showing their support like never before.

“We got way more people than I usually have, and man, you can feel it. I’'s something new in the air. Man, I’m back like Tina Turner after ‘What’s Love Got to Do With It,’” he laughed.

But before the victory, life was feeling dark, he admits.

“You start questioning your manhood when people come to where your family live and they kick the place in. ... It’s outrageous for people to come to your house and tear it up — especially when they got all their information wrong,” he tells Kibbe.

Even after the cops found nothing in Afroman’s home, the arrogance and ill will they carried into the raid lingered throughout the lawsuit, he recounted. “They were unapologetic and sarcastic and kind of delighting in the fact that they did vandalize my property.”

The trial, he says, was “set up in the police officers’ favor.”

“They dismissed my claims before I even went to court, so I was just in court to discuss how much money I was going to pay, you know, the vandals and thieves,” he recounts, adding that the warrant used to access his home had many “flaws,” but the court refused to address it.

However, Afroman nonetheless won the case. The jury ruled that his videos, which he says he made to help “pay for the damages” caused by the deputies, were protected under his free speech rights.

“Ultimately, in a nutshell, the police officers lost the case, and freedom of speech prevails in America,” he says triumphantly.

But freedom of speech wasn’t the end of Afroman’s victory. The lawsuit ended up drawing unprecedented attention to his album and music videos.

“[Those cops] did more for my social media in three days than I could do for myself in 15 years,” he says, noting that he gained “800,000 followers” in a matter of days because of the lawsuit.

But the biggest victory remains the protection of the First Amendment.

“Some countries, you can’t say nothing. You got to shut up. You can’t speak out against the government. ... But one of the beautiful things about America is, you know, you can speak,” he says.

“So, thank God I have it, and it’s the one thing that brought me justice.”

To hear the full interview, watch the video above.

Want more from Matt Kibbe?

To enjoy more of Matt's liberty-defending stance as he gets in the face of the fake news establishment, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.

'Dr. Lockdown': Ohio Democrat governor candidate's COVID tyranny comes back to haunt her — but she still may win



Amy Acton, the physician who served as director of the Ohio Department of Health in the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, is running as a Democrat in hopes of succeeding her former boss, Gov. Mike DeWine (R).

Although the Republican governor has attempted to shield his former underling from blame over her efforts to curtail basic liberties during the pandemic in the name of public health, critics appear unwilling to forgive or forget, especially with the election shaping up to be a close race.

'Amy Acton shut down our society.'

The Ohio Republican Party, for example, recalled on Tuesday that Acton "installed an order during COVID to lock down nursing homes," adding that "visits were deemed permissible for loved ones and patients based on whether or not they were 'grieving.' Truly sickening."

The state GOP noted in a previous post that Acton — who has been endorsed by Planned Parenthood of Greater Ohio and the Ohio Federation of Teachers — also saw to the closure of bars, restaurants, gyms, theaters, playgrounds, museums, libraries, fitness centers, and small businesses.

"She deemed her allies 'essential' — and left the rest to fend for themselves," said the Ohio GOP.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Vivek Ramaswamy, with whom Acton is poised to face off in November's general election, has dubbed her "Dr. Lockdown" and blasted the Democrat for her role in closing Ohio public schools — which she insisted in an interview last year was necessary — and businesses.

RELATED: Damning study of over a million kids finds myocarditis only in the vaccinated

Megan JELINGER/AFP/Getty Images

Hours before Ohioans were supposed to begin casting ballots in the state's March 2020 presidential primary, Acton ordered the closure of the polling locations. On the day of the punted vote, she ordered the closure of all Ohio bars and restaurants.

Days later, Acton issued a stay-at-home order, forbidding virtually all public and private gatherings occurring outside a single household; closing all "places of public amusement" including playgrounds; and prohibiting Ohioans from leaving their homes except for "Essential Activities, Essential Governmental Functions, or to participate in Essential Businesses and Operations."

Acton's actions prompted state lawmakers to introduce multiple bills aimed at reining in her power.

In the face of immense backlash and possible curbs on her authority, she resigned in June 2020.

"Amy Acton shut down our society," Ohio Senate President Rob McColley (R) tweeted on Thursday. "Then she walked away when Ohioans pleaded for help in getting back to normal. She quit on Ohio once and we won’t give her a chance to do it again."

Acton's campaign declined a request for comment from Blaze News about Republicans' recent criticism.

A Quantus Insights survey conducted last week found that 45.9% of respondents signaled support for Acton, 44.9% signaled support for Ramaswamy, nearly 6% said they were undecided, and 3.3% signaled support for some other candidate.

According to the survey, a plurality of respondents placed the economy, inflation, and the cost of living as the most important issues facing the state.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

FAKE CONSERVATIVES EXPOSED
play icon

FAKE CONSERVATIVES EXPOSED

The next fight over freedom will run through AI models



When it comes to artificial intelligence, the Trump administration has made its position clear: America will not choke innovation with red tape.

That instinct is understandable and, in many ways, correct. AI is moving fast, and heavy-handed regulation could do real damage. If the United States cripples its own companies, China will gladly take the advantage. And no one on the right wants blue-state politicians using AI rules to smuggle “woke” ideology into the next generation of powerful models.

The goal should be straightforward: Build an American AI future in which freedom is embedded from the start, and constitutional guardrails shape the systems that will increasingly shape us.

As White House AI adviser David Sacks recently put it, “We don’t like seeing blue states trying to insert their woke ideology in AI models, and we really want to try and stop that.”

Fair enough.

But what happens when resistance to bad regulation hardens into resistance to any regulation at all?

That question is now surfacing in Utah, where the White House is reportedly opposing a Republican-sponsored AI transparency bill. The fight may sound parochial, but it raises a much larger question: Do conservatives have the discipline to protect constitutional liberty in the AI age?

Utah isn’t California

The Utah proposal is not a European-style crackdown. It would not impose speech codes, mandate ideological compliance, or try to centrally plan the AI economy.

At its core, the bill focuses on transparency and accountability. It would require frontier AI companies to disclose serious risks, plan for safety in advance, report major problems, and protect whistleblowers who raise alarms.

That’s far from radical.

If the administration’s AI strategy is to stop progressive states from embedding political orthodoxy into algorithms, Utah’s bill does not belong in that category. The measure is about making sure the companies building extraordinarily powerful systems acknowledge the risks up front and take responsibility when things go wrong.

Treating that effort as if it were blue-state social engineering confuses two very different problems. There is a real difference between using AI regulation to enforce ideology and asking powerful firms to level with the public about systems that could reshape society.

The myth of an ‘unregulated’ AI market

Another uncomfortable truth lurks beneath this debate: AI is not operating in anything like a free-market vacuum.

The European Union has already enacted its sweeping AI Act. That regulatory regime will not stop at Europe’s borders. American companies that operate globally will feel its force, and American users will feel the downstream effects.

If the United States adopts a posture of total federal non-engagement, it will not preserve a neutral market. It will hand the regulatory initiative to Brussels.

That would be a serious mistake. Europe does not regulate with American constitutional principles in mind. It regulates through a bureaucratic worldview that prizes centralized control over freedom. If Washington refuses to establish clear guardrails rooted in our own constitutional tradition, foreign regulators and multinational firms will fill the void.

Power without constitutional guardrails

AI is quickly becoming part of the infrastructure of modern life. These systems increasingly shape how information flows, how public opinion forms, and how daily choices get nudged.

That is power.

We have already watched major corporations use private power to shape public life. Social-media companies moderated, suppressed, and curated speech in ways that tilted public debate. Large firms adopted ESG frameworks that embedded political priorities into lending, hiring, and investment. In both cases, powerful institutions pushed ideological outcomes without a vote being cast or a law being passed.

Nothing suggests AI will escape those pressures.

RELATED: If AI isn’t built for freedom, it will be programmed for control

gorodenkoff / Getty Images

The companies building frontier systems carry their own assumptions, incentives, and cultural biases. If those assumptions get baked into foundational models — and those models then get integrated into education, finance, media, hiring, and governance — ideological influence will move from the margins to the infrastructure of society.

Yes, clumsy central planning would hurt innovation and weaken America’s position against China. But the answer cannot be blind faith that market incentives alone will protect liberty. That asks a great deal of institutions that have already shown a willingness to steer political and cultural outcomes in their preferred direction.

The real challenge is making sure extraordinary technological power develops inside a framework that respects constitutional rights, individual liberty, and personal autonomy.

A pro-liberty AI framework

The Trump administration is right to resist ideological manipulation in AI models and to oppose sweeping regimes that would handicap American innovation while China races ahead.

But someone will shape the boundaries of this technology. The only real question is whether those boundaries reflect American constitutional principles or the preferences of foreign regulators and corporate boards.

Red states such as Utah should be treated as allies in that effort, not obstacles. They can serve as proving ground for approaches that protect transparency, due process, free expression, and individual autonomy without strangling innovation.

Artificial intelligence will shape the next century more than any single statute. Total non-engagement may sound pro-growth, but in practice it leaves the foundational rules of the AI era to someone else.

The goal should be straightforward: Build an American AI future in which freedom is embedded from the start, and constitutional guardrails shape the systems that will increasingly shape us.