Former Pentagon AI chief warns Flock cameras could create 'China-like surveillance state' in the US

Former Pentagon AI Director Warns of “China‑Like” Surveillance Risk Without Guardrails

In a televised interview on the Fox News program Saturday in America, Mark Beall, who once led the Pentagon’s AI policy office, cautioned that the rapid deployment of artificial‑intelligence‑powered surveillance devices—most notably Flock cameras—could turn U.S. communities into “China‑like surveillance states” unless clear rules and judicial oversight are imposed.

Flock cameras, a system that automatically reads license plates and stores vehicle data, have been rolled out in several southern states. Proponents argue they help solve crimes, while opponents point to privacy intrusions, data misuse, and a growing culture of “watch‑everything.”

“I think what we’re seeing across the board when it comes to artificial intelligence is that the innovation upside is so tremendous, but across all of these different use cases ... what we really need are strong guardrails, a strong policy that allows us to maintain those special values,” Beall said, underscoring the need for “constitutional guardrails” and court oversight.

Community pushback

The controversy has intensified in towns where Flock cameras line main roads and intersections. In Tennessee, the mayor called for constitutional safeguards before further deployment. Across Florida, transportation officials have ordered the removal of license‑plate readers from state highways within 30 days, citing privacy concerns and reports of data misuse.

The state’s governor, Ron De Santis, blasted the technology as an overreach. “If you want to get in your car and you want to go down to Buc‑ee’s in St. Augustine, it’s really none of the government’s damn business if you’re doing that, right?” De Santis told reporters. “We don’t want a digital AI surveillance state where everything we do is tracked at all times.”

Local activists have also taken a more confrontational approach. In one incident, teenagers reportedly smashed a Flock camera until the battery exploded, setting a nearby fire that threatened neighboring homes. The act sparked a broader backlash, with community members erecting signs to block camera lenses and demanding stricter regulations.

Political and legislative reactions

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I‑VT) has called for an outright ban on the technology, while Rep. Tim Burchett (R‑TN) is pushing to cut federal funding for local installations. The debate has drawn bipartisan attention, with lawmakers from both parties urging that any deployment be subject to robust oversight.

Flock Safety’s response

Flock Safety, the company behind the cameras, has announced a set of “new safeguards.” The firm has slashed its default data‑retention period to seven days, mandated misuse‑detection tools for all customers, and pledged to lead the industry in setting higher accountability standards.

“Today it is too often that in Flock and in other technologies, there’s no regulation. There’s no accountability, and we think that’s wrong,” CEO Garrett Langley told Fox News host Kayleigh McEnany. “We’re calling on state regulators to focus less on banning this type of technology and more on holding our law‑enforcement community accountable.”

Langley also emphasized the need for compromise. “When people talk about just one of these—privacy or safety—they’re prioritizing the wrong thing. What we have to prioritize as a country is compromise,” he said.

Legal challenges and misuse allegations

Adding to the scrutiny, an ex‑Indiana deputy has been charged with felony for allegedly using a Flock camera to stalk his girlfriend. The case underscores concerns that law‑enforcement officers may misuse the data for personal reasons if unchecked.

Looking ahead

As the debate unfolds, state agencies and lawmakers are evaluating how best to balance public safety benefits with privacy protections. With new safeguards in place and federal officials urging oversight, the next few months may set the tone for how AI‑driven surveillance will operate—and perhaps how America will navigate its constitutional principles in the age of algorithms.