On today’s episode of The Editors, we discussed Flock cameras. I said that they made me uncomfortable — not because they “don’t work,” but because they work all too well. In other words: While I concede that they will likely reduce crime, I do not consider that to be the end of the matter. Lots of things would reduce crime if implemented. That doesn’t mean that those things are necessarily a good idea in a free republic.

One of my co-panelists then suggested that Flock cameras present a Fourth Amendment problem because, in order to benefit from their data, law enforcement is required to use a database, which constitutes a “search.” Despite my general skepticism toward them as a matter of public policy, I disagreed with this position. We began to argue about it, but unfortunately, we ran out of time. So I thought I’d complete my thought here.

Simply put: I cannot see a Fourth Amendment problem with Flock cameras, because the data that they collect — and thus the data that is subsequently accessed by the police — is, and always was, presumptively public. The Fourth Amendment holds........

© National Review