[originally from November 20th, 2014]
Sousveillance surely can violate privacy, but not even remotely as severe as surveillance does. It could only make sense to outlaw sousveillance and enforce the law only if all the privacy issues of surveillance were solved. At the same time, sousveillance can be and is effectively used to expose and to some degree fight the governmental power abuse, whereas surveillance only gives the government more power. Whoever pushed the legislation against sousveillance in California, Maryland, and Illinois was either heavily deluded or intentionally acting for the benefit of the government rather than the people.
In fact, a case could be made that the right for sousveillance should be protected under the Second Amendment (while it’s still here), since that was the spirit of the law: give the citizens enough force so that the government would never forget who’s the source of power here. Apparently, guns don’t scare the government anymore, but cameras do.