What's incredible to me is that every element of each of those crimes is materially no different than what Garrett is doing with his cameras. If he thinks living under 24/7 constant surveillance is somehow causing criminal harm, then Garrett should argue that in open court and watch as the biggest class action lawsuit of all time lands in his lap.

I'm curious what the charges would be (loitering, stalking, harassment?).

It's interesting as a comparison to Flock. Their arguments (and those of their law enforcement clients) have often relied on the notion that they're simply automating activity that has always been legal, and that people don't have a reasonable expectation of privacy when in public view.

But I'm not sure that's strictly true anymore (if it ever was). I think you're right that private citizens performing these actions would very quickly attract law enforcement attention and quite probably arrest and civil/criminal charges.

Hell, I bet you wouldn't even need the camera or any tech at all. Just stand on the sidewalk and look at his home with a pen and notebook in hand. Wear a T-shirt that says "camera crew". Maybe bring a lawnchair and have a seat. See how long it takes for Garrett to have a problem with a human being existing nearby looking in his general direction.