Good question. I don't know the context of this OP, but I would clearly agree with you that a camera mounted in a place where eyes usually couldn't be could constitute an invasion of expected privacy.
Very dangerous way to define the difference. Security cameras, hobbyists, satalite imagery, aerial imagery could all be in danger.
Better, IMO, would be to say that some clothing provides reasonable expectation of privacy within the boundaries of the clothing, with certain exceptions. Exact details of an example statute probably not need to be hashed out in this thread.
It sounds to me like general consensus is that to defend right in face of it "being abused" is to find and define A difference which actually causes bad behavior to not be protected. I think, maybe, one of the KEYS here is that there is a victim.. Or, what else would prevent this same reasoning being applied to other rights like 2a, or even same right in other context like saying filming police isn't covered just because it's considered immoral by some (or so they may claim).
"Police is victim when being filmed because it distracts them from their difficult/dangerous job" - why not? Well it is claiming a different reason for the officer being a victim. Not an expectation of privacy, but an expectation that someone not do anything distracting. I don't think a person has a per se 'right' to not be 'distracted', but probably to not be interfered with. So would the solution here be to find what level of 'distraction' constitutes 'interference'?
Sounds like there is disagreement on whether or not police should arrest for something that is not unlawful if the office finds the conduct immoral or in bad taste. Interesting.
I think my point has been made... You can accept the fact that with any right there are going to be difficult things to discuss and figure out, or you can just snub your nose at any topic that makes you uncomfortable and say "not me! doesn't effect me! doesn't have anything to do with MY rights!" and let others that are more bold figure out the solutions.