Stlhead,

Your examples differ fundamentally because they violate civil liberties with invasion of privacy, unreasonable search without probably cause. I would be hard pressed to say that the 9th Amendment (since the 4th doesn't either) prohibits my being caught running red lights or speeding by use of technology instead of police manpower.

Aunty,

Yeah, potentially a slippery slope. Consider for a moment, the constructioin site is private property, so a camera can only be installed by a private party, like me, to keep an eye on my contractor. River cameras might be a darn good idea if they weren't impractical. It remains my expectation for some privacy in a restroom.

I was looking for some fundamental element of violation of a civil liberty. Cameras are an extension of the long arm of the law, sort of like speed guns used by police, much more efficient than following and pacing each speeder on the road. If I had an expectation that I should be able to run red lights and speed on the highway without risk, then I'd see the logical reason to oppose these. I gotta' believe the reason for using these mechanisms is because they're more cost effective than hiring more police, which we already know the public is loathe to pay for more of. If this doesn't violate civil rights, then how is this a bad thing, other than the slippery slope argument?

Sg