A free society should be cautious whenever government asks citizens to surrender privacy in exchange for promises of safety.
By Staff Writer
The proposal is usually presented as straightforward: Install cameras, collect license-plate information, allow law enforcement to search the records, and crime will be reduced. Anyone who objects may be portrayed as suspicious, unreasonable, or unconcerned about public safety.
But the central question is not whether cameras can sometimes help solve crimes. Of course they can. The more important question is whether a constitutional republic should create searchable records of innocent people’s movements without individualized suspicion, a warrant, meaningful public consent, or effective oversight.
That question is not merely about technology. It reaches into the Fourth Amendment, due process, the presumption of innocence, the right to confront witnesses, and the principle that government—not the accused—must prove its case
