Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Dashboard Cams


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#1 Manx Bean

Manx Bean

    MF Addicted

  • Regulars
  • 501 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:13 PM

Whilst I accept they are the latest must have driving accessory it seems, I have one question:

 

Should the owners not have to be registered with the Data Protection Registrar (or whatever they are called these days) to record members of the public - which is what other road users are?

 

Maybe one for our MHKs to pick up...

 

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=32580&headline=Driver%20fined%20£250%20for%20looking%20at%20mobile%20phone&sectionIs=NEWS&searchyear=2017



#2 Albert Tatlock

Albert Tatlock

    Grumpy Old Man

  • Regulars
  • 25,540 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:28 PM

No. You can take pictures/film most things from public land/roads.

#3 the stinking enigma

the stinking enigma

    MF Veteran

  • Regulars
  • 4,958 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:29 PM

I'll wager whoever took it has more than a few skeltons in their closet

#4 dilligaf

dilligaf

    MF Veteran

  • Regulars
  • 6,011 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:30 PM

Whilst I accept they are the latest must have driving accessory it seems, I have one question:

 

Should the owners not have to be registered with the Data Protection Registrar (or whatever they are called these days) to record members of the public - which is what other road users are?

 

Maybe one for our MHKs to pick up...

 

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=32580&headline=Driver%20fined%20£250%20for%20looking%20at%20mobile%20phone&sectionIs=NEWS&searchyear=2017

 

I think you can film all you want to in a public place, providing it is not pervy I would have thought.

Very sad that somebody actually went to the police with their "evidence" . They must feel very proud.

I hope the snitch doesn't live in a glass house and doesn't let their halo slip

I thought the whole point of the dashcam was to settle any dispute in the event of being in a bump



#5 Keith

Keith

    MF Senior Member

  • Regulars
  • 472 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:35 PM

 

Whilst I accept they are the latest must have driving accessory it seems, I have one question:

 

Should the owners not have to be registered with the Data Protection Registrar (or whatever they are called these days) to record members of the public - which is what other road users are?

 

Maybe one for our MHKs to pick up...

 

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=32580&headline=Driver%20fined%20£250%20for%20looking%20at%20mobile%20phone&sectionIs=NEWS&searchyear=2017

 

I think you can film all you want to in a public place, providing it is not pervy I would have thought.

 

 

 

 

Can do it even if it is pervy, for example paparazzi photos of Kate Middleton sunbathing topless, taken with a huge lens. I know it was a different country but basically the same law.



#6 jah_pet

jah_pet

    MF Junior Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 88 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:36 PM

I would do the same, only thing that would stop me is the time it would take me and hassle that it would cause. Its not hard to stay off your mobile while driving. With the state of peoples driving on this island you could go out with a camcorder and come back with enough examples of careless driving in a couple of hours to keep the courts busy for months.


  • woolley and Neil Down like this

#7 Tarne

Tarne

    MF Veteran

  • Regulars
  • 3,622 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:37 PM

Oh for fucks sake, the dude was doing the right thing by pulling over. Common sense here Police... 


  • dilligaf, doc.fixit, louis and 2 others like this

#8 craggy_steve

craggy_steve

    Travelling hopefully towards disillusionment

  • Regulars
  • 858 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:39 PM

Whilst I accept they are the latest must have driving accessory it seems, I have one question:

 

Should the owners not have to be registered with the Data Protection Registrar (or whatever they are called these days) to record members of the public - which is what other road users are?

 

Maybe one for our MHKs to pick up...

 

http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=32580&headline=Driver%20fined%20£250%20for%20looking%20at%20mobile%20phone&sectionIs=NEWS&searchyear=2017

 

Actually the Information Comissioner has explicitly published his opinion on the personal use of dashcams to report "poor driving". Basically if the dashcam is personally owned and used for personal domestic purposes then there is no need for the owner to register with the Information Commissioner - https://www.inforigh...echnology-cctv/

 

However ... the news report doesn't tell us that the dashcam was privately owned, installed for purposes other than the recording of bad driving,  mounted in a privately owned vehicle, which was not at the time being used for business purposes. If any of those four is not true then it would be possible that the owner of the dashcam needed to be registered with the Information Commissioner for the purpose, and display appropriate warnings visible from outside the vehicle, or was otherwise in breach of the DPA. 

 

Personally If I was "the Police" I'd be very wary of accepting this type of evidence without assurance that the images were gathered lawfully. If I were the chap who has just been penalised I'd be very tempted to report the matter to the Information Commissioner. 



#9 Sheldon

Sheldon

    MF Senior Member

  • Regulars
  • 419 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:43 PM

Very sad that somebody actually went to the police with their "evidence" . They must feel very proud.

 

On any given day I probably see a dozen other drivers on their mobile while in motion, or parked on double-yellows because - surely - that call takes precedence over any other rules of the road, and if they introduced a reward for grassing them up I might well do so. I should therefore applaud this good citizen for their actions, and yet some deeper instinct whispers to me that they're a sad piece of work, and probably have malformed genitalia.


  • ballaughbiker likes this

#10 Albert Tatlock

Albert Tatlock

    Grumpy Old Man

  • Regulars
  • 25,540 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:43 PM

It's all about PACE.

Police Accounts Currently Empty.

#11 the stinking enigma

the stinking enigma

    MF Veteran

  • Regulars
  • 4,958 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:47 PM

.

Edited by the stinking enigma, 20 March 2017 - 07:48 PM.


#12 ballaughbiker

ballaughbiker

    MF Veteran

  • Regulars
  • 4,927 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:53 PM

 

However ... the news report doesn't tell us that the dashcam was privately owned, installed for purposes other than the recording of bad driving,  mounted in a privately owned vehicle, which was not at the time being used for business purposes. If any of those four is not true then it would be possible that the owner of the dashcam needed to be registered with the Information Commissioner for the purpose, and display appropriate warnings visible from outside the vehicle, or was otherwise in breach of the DPA. 

 

It also says that the police can ask for the 'evidence' but I think going to them with it without being asked isn't quite the same thing.


  • craggy_steve likes this

#13 Douglas Prom

Douglas Prom

    MF Senior Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 07:53 PM

Good on whoever shopped the fucking wanker!

You lot can have a valid opinion when you've had a family member killed by a driver on a phone.

A £250 fine is a fucking piss tske. Should be £2,500 and an instant ban.
  • woolley and Neil Down like this

#14 hboy

hboy

    MF Veteran

  • Regulars
  • 4,839 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 08:17 PM

Whilst I accept they are the latest must have driving accessory it seems, I have one question:
 
Should the owners not have to be registered with the Data Protection Registrar (or whatever they are called these days) to record members of the public - which is what other road users are?
 
Maybe one for our MHKs to pick up...
 
http://www.iomtoday.co.im/article.cfm?id=32580&headline=Driver%20fined%20£250%20for%20looking%20at%20mobile%20phone&sectionIs=NEWS&searchyear=2017

 
I think you can film all you want to in a public place, providing it is not pervy I would have thought.
Very sad that somebody actually went to the police with their "evidence" . They must feel very proud.
I hope the snitch doesn't live in a glass house and doesn't let their halo slip
I thought the whole point of the dashcam was to settle any dispute in the event of being in a bump

I agree. Anyone who buys a dash cam is either a boy racer (who posts their stupid exploits on YouTube and gets themselves arrested whilst stupidly providing their own evidence), or is just an irritating busy body. They usually fall into category two as there is no point to them other than being a pathetic busy body who goes blabbing to the cops whenever they see something they don't like. Same as those stupid cyclists who wear the helmet cams. Camcorders are just more ammunition for twats to be twats with.
  • dilligaf likes this

#15 pongo

pongo

    Tory Sauce

  • Subscribers
  • 7,226 posts

Posted 20 March 2017 - 08:26 PM

if they introduced a reward for grassing them up I might well do so. I should therefore applaud this good citizen for their actions, and yet some deeper instinct whispers to me that they're a sad piece of work


The inner thoughts of typical East German in 1978.
  • Tarne and dilligaf like this




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users