Taxi Driver Online
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/

Charlie's Association calls for CCTV in all cabs.
http://www.taxi-driver.co.uk/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=17836		 Page 1 of 3
Author:  charles007 [ Sat Nov 12, 2011 9:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Charlie's Association calls for CCTV in all cabs.
The Association call for CCTV in all cab's.

We see this the only way to stop members of the public falsly accusing Drivers.
Author:  Gobby [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
But who pays for them?
Will they be in COF so if not working the Taxis off the road?
If the Council want them to check on drivers its an enforcement issue and should be paid by them.

On ebay there are £60 audio & sound units with night vision with a viewing screen powered from the cigg lighter socket.
What sends the price sky up is the attempt to make them inaccessible to the driver and always switched on. This is an impossible task anyway so why bother? That audio sound recording is not advocated by data protection lobbies makes it even less of an attraction for nosy councils.

Taxis & PH certainly need them to protect from malicious accusation...but at what price?
Author:  grandad [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 10:04 am ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
Gobby wrote:
Taxis & PH certainly need them to protect from malicious accusation...but at what price?

What price do you put on your liberty?
Why do some drivers think that cctv is there to spy on them? It should/would only ever be viewed if there were an incident. So unless you are a driver with something to hide, where is the problem?
Author:  charles007 [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 4:22 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
grandad wrote:
Gobby wrote:
Taxis & PH certainly need them to protect from malicious accusation...but at what price?

What price do you put on your liberty?
Why do some drivers think that cctv is there to spy on them? It should/would only ever be viewed if there were an incident. So unless you are a driver with something to hide, where is the problem?


let me say this wether guilty or not, how many drivers have won on a complaint against the public, never mind police officers. drivers need as much protection as poisbile.
Author:  Sussex [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 5:02 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
charles007 wrote:
The Association call for CCTV in all cab's.

We see this the only way to stop members of the public falsly accusing Drivers.

I couldn't agree with you more Charlie. =D>

As for the liberty issue, I say f*** it. I'm more concerned about the death issue.

I'm also very pleased that you have highlighted the false claim subject. Falsely being accused of anything by a punter can be a very traumatic.

I know a driver who was accused of touch9ng up a school kid many years ago, yet despite that particular child having made many similar claims, the driver went through hell.

Fortunately she eventually told the truth. But I wouldn't wish that on anyone.
Author:  Sussex [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 5:04 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
Gobby wrote:
Taxis & PH certainly need them to protect from malicious accusation...but at what price?

Well you tell us.

Is your job/life/future/vehicle/peace of mind/livelihood worth £60, £100, £300, or more?
Author:  Gobby [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:00 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
grandad wrote:
Gobby wrote:
Taxis & PH certainly need them to protect from malicious accusation...but at what price?

What price do you put on your liberty?
Why do some drivers think that cctv is there to spy on them? It should/would only ever be viewed if there were an incident. So unless you are a driver with something to hide, where is the problem?


Having witnessed first hand the Entertainment value this gives to some council CCTV operators I would not wish my entire life in the Taxi, both working and social to be laid bare before them. Their front of "very professional", never disclose and respecting data protection is far from the truth within their own circles. I would consider this a total infringement of my liberty and personal life. How many Government workers can you imagine welcoming a 24/7 video/audio surveillance of their lives?
Author:  Gobby [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
Sussex wrote:
Gobby wrote:
Taxis & PH certainly need them to protect from malicious accusation...but at what price?

Well you tell us.

Is your job/life/future/vehicle/peace of mind/livelihood worth £60, £100, £300, or more?


A £60 camera with audio/night vision would do the job perfectly for my protection. To add the need for council to have their spy in the taxi would raise camera cost to £400-£500. Its an enforcement issue, let them pay the difference. Or have them do their jobs properly to ensure all drivers are fit n proper.
Author:  captain cab [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:10 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
Gobby wrote:
Having witnessed first hand the Entertainment value this gives to some council CCTV operators I would not wish my entire life in the Taxi, both working and social to be laid bare before them. Their front of "very professional", never disclose and respecting data protection is far from the truth within their own circles. I would consider this a total infringement of my liberty and personal life. How many Government workers can you imagine welcoming a 24/7 video/audio surveillance of their lives?


=D>
Author:  charles007 [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charlie's Association calls for CCTV in all cabs.
I dont recall call saying its charlie's Association calls for cctv in all cabs

Mind you i did andrew overton some years ago why dont you put them in when you make them well it came down to money i would have thought it would have been cheper.
Author:  Gobby [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:37 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charlie's Association calls for CCTV in all cabs.
charles007 wrote:
I dont recall call saying its charlie's Association calls for cctv in all cabs

Mind you i did andrew overton some years ago why dont you put them in when you make them well it came down to money i would have thought it would have been cheper.


Charlie, It would be much cheaper and affordable if you remove a Councils need to have their snouts peering over your shoulder. Wonder how Southampton are doing? :D
Author:  grandad [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 6:39 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
Gobby wrote:
Having witnessed first hand the Entertainment value this gives to some council CCTV operators I would not wish my entire life in the Taxi, both working and social to be laid bare before them. Their front of "very professional", never disclose and respecting data protection is far from the truth within their own circles. I would consider this a total infringement of my liberty and personal life. How many Government workers can you imagine welcoming a 24/7 video/audio surveillance of their lives?

Are you seriously expecting us to believe that you have been present when the cctv from a taxi has been viewed by the council for an investigation? The cctv from a taxi should only be viewed following an incident. Unless there has been an incident, why would the cctv from a taxi be in the possetion of the council?
Author:  Sussex [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:34 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charlie's Association calls for CCTV in all cabs.
From my experience of dealing with members of the trade who are against compulsory CCTV many of them are complete and utter liars that have something to hide.

Not all, but if they don't want it then just say we don't want it, or can't afford it, stop the lies and scaremongering.

The 'I don't want the council seeing what I do in my own time' comments are utter rubbish. Despite what some may think of LOs they all got have better things than trawling through hours of cab drivers talking to the misses.

But even if they did decide to be right nosey, is that such a price to pay for not being dead?

Supporters of compulsory CCTV have a job to prove stats that will never happen i.e. how do you quantify the reduction in attacks that haven't happened due to CCTV?

But I'm quite happy to assume that in a few years there will be drivers driving that wouldn't be, solely down to CCTV.

And equally happy to assume that some drivers will not be driving, solely down to CCTV.
Author:  Gobby [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:47 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: we call
grandad wrote:
Gobby wrote:
Having witnessed first hand the Entertainment value this gives to some council CCTV operators I would not wish my entire life in the Taxi, both working and social to be laid bare before them. Their front of "very professional", never disclose and respecting data protection is far from the truth within their own circles. I would consider this a total infringement of my liberty and personal life. How many Government workers can you imagine welcoming a 24/7 video/audio surveillance of their lives?

Are you seriously expecting us to believe that you have been present when the cctv from a taxi has been viewed by the council for an investigation? The cctv from a taxi should only be viewed following an incident. Unless there has been an incident, why would the cctv from a taxi be in the possetion of the council?


Not Taxis, but old drinking buddies who loved to relate what they had seen on security cameras "between you me and the gatepost"...I see no reason why, given human nature, a council employee should be any different when tanked up and wishing to impress.
Author:  Gobby [ Sun Nov 13, 2011 8:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Charlie's Association calls for CCTV in all cabs.
Quote:
From my experience of dealing with members of the trade who are against compulsory CCTV many of them are complete and utter liars that have something to hide.
Not all, but if they don't want it then just say we don't want it, or can't afford it, stop the lies and scaremongering.


I am pleased you said not all, it would be harsh to suggest all who stand against snooping councils have something to hide.

Quote:
The 'I don't want the council seeing what I do in my own time' comments are utter rubbish. Despite what some may think of LOs they all got have better things than trawling through hours of cab drivers talking to the misses.
But even if they did decide to be right nosey, is that such a price to pay for not being dead?


So first you say LOs would never have time to indulge in this, next you quantify "even if they did" its still ok? :roll:

Quote:
But I'm quite happy to assume that in a few years there will be drivers driving that wouldn't be, solely down to CCTV
.
Indeed!
Quote:
And equally happy to assume that some drivers will not be driving, solely down to CCTV.

I should like to think these Drivers will not be around due to proactive LOs doing their job properly and not sitting in the office awaiting the crime to view.
Page 1 of 3 All times are UTC [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/