Digital Video Cameras should be mandatory in new vehicles | Page 3 | GTAMotorcycle.com

Digital Video Cameras should be mandatory in new vehicles

Sorry Shaun but, despite the fact that I have and use cameras myself, I have to disagree with you. In our legal system you have a right against self incrimination. Having your vehicle testify against you is tantamount to such. If I have a camera it's for my own use and I have no duty to disclose what's on it, barring it being seized and used as evidence in a criminal proceeding. It's for ME.

And that's why I also disagree with your comments regarding mirrors and seat belts. These are largely for the benefit and safety of the driver. They don't serve a purpose to police. Investigation is not safety.

And Splash, I also disagree with the presence of the event data recorder. It bugs the crap out of me.

*EDIT*

Additionally, I find that your methodology is flawed. You comment on the increase in the number of fatalities and the spike in the number of accidents. Numbers are relatively meaningless. The rate of collisions and deaths has been trendign downward for decades, when considered by population.
 
Last edited:
In part Rob. I didn't say that fatalities are increasing. I said crashes are. In fact fatalities have steadily decreased in Canada over the past decade. Crashes however have increased. Car makers have made their products more...crashable and survivable. National, provincial and even municipal road reports are all available online for anyone to look up (I'd rather not be accused again of 'finding' evidence to support my claim) should anyone feel inclined to really dive into road safety issues (like I have done). You Rob know that this is something that I take great interest in and it would be fair to say that I have a better than average knowledge on the topic. Based on our past discussions, I would say you do also. Most people however are pretty ignorant about road safety.

My initial mention about seatbelts and mirrors was simply an example of previous items that was never present or required until laws were introduced saying they were. I'm not sure if currently the EDR units are required by law but I'm glad they are there. In the case of that recent crash that killed 11 people...there were no useful witnesses. The three people who did survive weren't in any condition to provide information about what happened.

Everyone was in an uproar demanding answers (public, media, police and even the MTO) and thanks to the EDR in the van, answers came pretty quickly showing that the driver of the van ran that stop sign. Had a camera been inside and the last 5min leading up to the crash been recorded also, we would also know WHY he ran the stop sign. That's a more important question for me. In the video clip in my article, you see a SUV running a red light and had the lady pushing the stroller not noticed the SUV approaching at speed, she and her baby may have been struck. In that case though, it seems clear (thanks to my footage) that the driver was too selfish and impatient to wait an extra 30sec for her to safely cross the road.
 
What it comes down to Shaun, in most simple of terms, is that I don't want to live in a society of mandated government surveillance. We have to walk a fine line between the public good, and the privacy of person. To me, this sort of thing takes one giant step over that line.
 
In the most simple of terms...I agree with you and it's a good thing neither of us live in London, England which hosts more CCTV cameras than any other city. They do little to prevent crime but because of them, they greatly succeeded in capturing criminals. The question really does come down to where we draw the line. In my opinion though, in-car cameras would be a huge asset and since it would only record a few minutes of footage (unless a crash is detected), it's far less 'Big Brother' than walking the streets of London or even downtown Toronto where you can be watched and followed for hours while walking on public streets. One of the fundimentals about driving is that it's a privilege, not a right.
 
Last edited:
just because an activity isn't a charter right doesn't mean you have NO rights when you do it.
 
Rob MacLennan said:
And Splash, I also disagree with the presence of the event data recorder. It bugs the crap out of me.
Click to expand...

I agree and I actually looked into removing it... but it's impossible. It's built into the ECU. The only way to get rid of it would be to remove the memory chip and replace it with a fake one.
 
Last edited:
Yes "for the children"
 
油井緋色;1730318 said:
I'm getting a Contour incase the Ragu incident ever happens to me. But as for my house, don't need it, that's what knives, baseball bats, and body bags are for. No witnesses in the house amirite?

And by the way, I'm not thinking about using this **** to save lives, I'm thinking about using this **** to save myself from getting pinned by *corrupt popo, Ragu-look-alikes, or just people who recently immigrated in here that can't drive.
Click to expand...

DUDE! you seriously need to get off the immigrant bashing and can't drive business. Especially because you are one.

And i'm pretty sure when you pull a bone head move on the road the person you did it on is saying "Damm, crazy Asians can't drive".

For the record, I've been in 4 accidents in my life time on the road, 3 of them were white dudes who were either look down to light their cigarettes or driving a vehicle with no insurance and no breaks. The 4th was an asian chick too busy chatting with her friends
(within 2 km of pacific mall).
 
I'm all for information gathering if it's used as a tool. Unfortunately it's too often used as a weapon. That includes various survellance medias, racial profiling etc. If there's a problem and stats help find a solution it's a good thing but too many people use stats to label groups "I told you those XXXXs are trouble. Here's proof."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom