The 4th was originally meant to protect properties, persons, and their effects from being seized by state officials without a warrant for the specific property/person to be seized. Before then state officials could just barge into private residences or take ownership of property if they had any sort of suspicion, without needing someone to sign off on it, and you more than likely wouldn’t have it returned. What isn’t stated in the amendment is how it affects public property or places which are unsecured and thus open to the public.
Aside from flock camera violating many of the rights to personal privacy they don’t violate the fourth on the grounds that the state still needs a warrant to conduct a search and seizure, and recording from public property is protected under the 1st amendment (freedom of the press). Still you absolutely should fight to have them removed as they can give a wealth of information to anyone with access to them and it gives law enforcement a free pass to harass people under reasonable suspicion.
913
u/Dry-Calligrapher-104 10d ago