UK Launches National Dashcam Database For Snitching On Bad Drivers (cnet.com) 235
An anonymous reader quotes a report from CNET: Drivers in England and Wales now have a direct line to police for ratting on their fellow motorists, thanks to a new national dash cam database. The National Dash Cam Safety Portal, run by UK dashcam manufacturer Nextbase, lets drivers upload footage from their dashcam to a single database and send it directly to police, the BBC reports. Drivers can choose their region of England or Wales and send footage of accidents or illegal behavior on the road directly to local police, as well as sending a witness statement that can then be used in court.
UK National service doesn't include Scotland or NI (Score:3, Informative)
The fact that it doesn't include Scotland, or Northern Ireland doesn't really make it a 'UK National' service.
Admittedly, Scotland does have its own legal system, which may have subtly different procedures to follow.
Also terms and conditions of the service mean that NextBase is entitled to use your clips in their adverts, or possibly sending them on to those car crash tv shows.
11. Rights you license
11.1 When you upload or post content to our site (including, but without limitation dashcam videos), you grant to us a perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, non-exclusive, sub-licensable, royalty-free and transferable licence to use, exploit, copy, store, disclose, reproduce, publish, distribute, prepare derivative works of, display, perform and otherwise use that content for any purpose across any media including, but not limited to, promoting the site and its content, promoting our business, and promoting our products and services.
However, earlier on in the terms, it states that "Whilst you retain legal ownership of your rights in your content, you are required to grant us the license described in paragraph 11 (Rights you license)."
Re: (Score:2)
The fact that it doesn't include Scotland, or Northern Ireland doesn't really make it a 'UK National' service.
Given the fact that this is being run by a private company (dashcam brand Nextbase) who are simply submitting the footage to the police on your bahalf, it's not even an English and Welsh service... Its a private service that will likely be ignored by the Police.
call me later (Score:2)
I'm not willing to trade off our rights until this is a real-time in-vehicle tagging system with 4k video upload over cellular and police cars flying by to catch the asshole I've tagged.
Bullshit slashvert clickbait misleading title... (Score:4, Informative)
It's not "the UK" and it's not a "national database" seemingly run by the Gov. or the police.
It is a private site, run by a private dashcam company, that just redirects you to the individual police force pace, (England and Wales only, so if it's Scotland or NI you're looking for then you're SOL).
They are nice-enough to state in their T&Cs that "You may be use [sic] the NDSP to upload footage from any dash cam, action camera, mobile phone or any other type of camera from any manufacturer."
I bloody well should think so, since they're just linking through to the cops own sites!
Re:Bullshit slashvert clickbait misleading title.. (Score:4, Interesting)
It's got police force logos on it, which implies that they endorse it. If they don't then hopefully they will pay Nextbase a visit to sort that out.
Re: (Score:2)
It's got police force logos on it, which implies that they endorse it. If they don't then hopefully they will pay Nextbase a visit to sort that out.
Do you live in the UK?
Have you not seen the thousands of Walts on bycyles with yellow POLITE jackets trying to look like they're cops? That matters not.
For the Johnny Foreigners amongst us, in the UK we've got legions of cyclists wearing vests like this [morebikes.co.uk] so that you might get them confused with one of these [protec-supplies.co.uk].
Use of police logos is not a crime, hell... we dont even prosecute people who pretend to be police. Also, the logo's are buried down at the bottom of the page next to big writing saying "We suppo
Larry Himmel covered this (Score:5, Interesting)
Simply brilliant
/ RIP funny man
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All in all a fun idea. Infeasible but fun.
Larry Himmel was a comedian.
Re: (Score:2)
A Dave Barry column from 2004 [miamiherald.com] gives credit to Gallagher.
Not enough time in the day ... (Score:2)
Really, what kind of Do-Gooder has the time and energy to upload twenty videos every day? Sure, they're persistent, but there's a limit even with that crowd.
Broken cnet link (Score:4, Informative)
Not sure if anyone actually wants to follow the cnet link in TFA, but it's broken. Here's a working one: https://www.cnet.com/uk/news/u... [cnet.com]
Bad! (Score:3)
Just as people snitching on child abusers, robbers, rapists, violent thugs is bad! If people want to risk the life of others and behaving dangerously they should be able to without being being told on by stinking rats!
If this continues drunks can't safely drive home on the wrong side of the road anymore. Incredible.
A safer world? I think not. (Score:2, Insightful)
Its starts with reporting bad behavior on the road.. it ends with people who express out loud in a pub their empathy for the peaceful majority of Muslims being dragged from their families in the middle of the night, and never seen again.
Who'se actually "
Re: (Score:2)
You could have the best intentions with such system, but result will be setting neighbors against each other. There is zero chance this won't be weaponized in some form to settle scores.
Re:A safer world? I think not. (Score:5, Insightful)
>A population that informs on itself to the police stops being a civilization
What, so you should never call the police to report something? If you see a murder in progress you should just shrug and carry on? If you see someone walking into a busy area brandishing a knife aggressively then you should just carry on as if nothing happened? If you see someone get dragged into a van kicking and screaming which then drives off at high speed then you should do nothing?
If you wanted to argue against people reporting each other for comparatively minor things I might understand, but you're saying that people should never assist the police. Your argument is extreme to the point of idiocy. The idea that you can either tell the police nothing or end up in a dystopian police state is a false dichotomy.
Re: (Score:2)
Just viewing some dashcam channels will show how there are some really bad and dangerous drivers. Love it when they get instant karma.
Re: (Score:2)
In the UK this is countered, believe it or not, by the police force.
They have discretion, common sense, just want to get the job done, aren't interested in pursuing every little spat at gunpoint, but also aren't disinterested if they can see you're worried or have a genuine grievance.
Most of these will be ignored. Some will result in a little letter saying "We've had a report that... " with zero enforcability. The serious ones will result in a case just as they should.
But if you haven't lived in the UK, y
Re: (Score:2)
A population that informs on itself to the police stops being a civilization
I see. So, if you or someone you loved were attacked in public you would want people to pretend it wasn't happening and for everyone to tell the police they didn't see a thing, yes? Otherwise you are a hypocrite. Hell, I kind of wish I knew where to find you so I could mug your stupid ass then if you reported it to the police I could post it here showing your are a hypocrite.
In fact, a civilization requires people to follow the laws of the civilization and it requires people to enforce those laws and it r
Hayling Islanders (Score:2)
This is going to give them a whole new, potentially litigious way of abusing visitors to the island. Wow.
The police have obviously latched on to rate-driver
Hey, pedestrians have cameras too! (Score:2)
Why stop with dashcams? I would love to have an app where you could just take a photo of a double parked car, or a dog owner not picking up after, and send it with GPS and time info to the police. Even if most were ignored, as they would surely be, the feeling of having done something would help me.
A police state is not created because the police have too many information, but because they are not controlled enough.
Depends What You Do With It (Score:2)
The reasonableness of doing so depends in part on what you do with it. If you warn the person against doing it again, you can set up a situation that when the police catch the person driving recklessly the court can set the punishment based on the total history, not just the incident the police caught.
Using it to issue warnings would also give the driver an incentive to correct himself.
So there are socially reasonable ways to use it, if you can get past the whole Big Brother thing.
Lane blockers (Score:2)
Overload (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
There's a difference between "poor" driving and "dangerous" driving.
Sure, poor can be dangerous, but it's not automatic.
Dangerous infers a deliberate, considered action where you know the risk to yourself and others in increased for no good reason.
My dashcam captures THOUSANDS of incidences of poor driving, everything from not indicating to insufficient braking distance to speeding. And although they are "dangerous" as actions, they are not *legally* "dangerous driving". That's another thing entirely. Th
"Snitching"? (Score:2)
Nice to know you think reporting dangerous driving and crimes is a bad thing. Why do asshats like you think like that?
Reminds me of watching people in a high crime neighborhood crying on the news about how cops don't solve their crimes while watching the same people post on line about "don't snitch". In fact. I literally saw someone one year protesting the police chanting "don't snitch" then a few months later begging people to tell the police what they know, AKA snitching, about the
It is said ... (Score:2)
that most drivers considered themselves above average.
However I can't help noticing when watching dashcam videos on youtube from Russia and America, that they are by far the best drivers in the developed world when it comes to performing spectacular feats of epic failure in the shit driving caught on cam videos.
We are pretty boring by comparison.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Re:Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not in the UK, but I'm all for ratting out drivers who have no concern for my or my family's safety.
If I had access to such a facility, I don't believe I would be bothered to submit footage of everyday misdemeanours that all drivers make, but blatant reckless and life endangering driving should be reported and I'd be happy to assist in that.
I have mixed opinions on this.
Yeah, sure, there have been times I wish a cop had been around to witness someone doing something egregiously bad. However, everyone has done something stupid whilst driving at some point. Everyone has done something illegal, either on purpose or by accident.
Never misread a sign? Gone the wrong way down a one way street - or driven at 70mph in a 60mph zone?
I guarantee what is going to happen here is every Spurs fan is going to start trying to catch Arsenal football players making a mistake whilst driving. United fans are going to try to catch and force Liverpool players into making mistakes. People are going to target their rivals, enemies, and people they don't like... and people will get caught making silly mistakes.
Re: (Score:3)
>"Never misread a sign? Gone the wrong way down a one way street - or driven at 70mph in a 60mph zone?"
Yeah, I have mixed feelings too.
It is one thing to report someone with a hit-and-run, weaving in and out of traffic, driving drunk, riding on the wrong side of the road, going 40MPH over the speed limit, or backing up an exit ramp and such.... and quite another when it is an expired tag, not coming to an ABSOLUTE stop at a stop sign, or running a yellow light.
Re: Police state (Score:2)
I come to a complete stop at stop signs and people often react badly. It throws the 'roll through' drivers off their rhythm.
Re: (Score:2)
>"I come to a complete stop at stop signs and people often react badly. It throws the 'roll through' drivers off their rhythm."
Around here, I would guess that about 80% of Stop signs don't require a "full" stop to assess if it is safe to proceed. Probably HALF of them could be safely replaced with Yield signs. Alas, it seems people don't comprehend what "Yield" means, so seeing a Yield sign is rare, indeed. Instead, we have more and more and more 4-way stops.
Re: (Score:2)
Perhaps it's just me, or how the signs are used where I've been, but "yield" generally conveys an image of "prepare to merge with traffic" - pay attention, be ready to stop if necessary, but don't necessarily slow down significantly. Most of the problem stop signs I see are used in places where there's no reason for a full stop, but a significant slow down really is called for.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree. There are far too many stop signs in the world and not nearly enough go signs. 4 way stops are the lazy "traffic calming" or "I don't want to design this intersection".
Re: (Score:2)
Hell the people around Atlanta can't even figure out the "Keep Moving" signs telling them not to stop.
Re: (Score:2)
There are systems like this where I live, though they are not widely known. I've probably contributed tens of thousands of dollars to government finances through reporting bad drivers. It's a discretion thing - it takes a lot of effort to report another driver, and I have to make sure the evidence is on video and is in breach of the road laws. I also have to fill in a statement, which means attending a police station. Unless someone does something really bad in front of me, I just let it go.
This has two eff
Re:Police state (Score:4, Insightful)
The solution to the fact that everyone makes mistakes driving is not to let everyone get away with it. It's to reduce the fines to the point where people who rarely make mistakes can afford it but people who make them constantly can't afford it (this also really requires adjusting fines to the driver's income, but that's a different matter).
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
There is a better solution to 'occasional mistakes' operating in the UK. If you are caught, for instance, a few miles/hour over the limit you are given the option of doing a 1/2 day 'driver awareness' course that costs £70-£110. The benefit is that it is not a conviction so you avoid having points put on your license (get 12 & lose it). There is confusion as to if you need to tell your insurer - but you must if they ask. You are not given the choice if you have taken a course in the last 3 y
Re: (Score:2)
There is confusion as to if you need to tell your insurer - but you must if they ask.
There is no confusion. You don't have to tell them.
Some insurers insurers usually operate a “catch all” clause in their policies about keeping them informed about factors which may affect your driving, and failing to declare a course could lead them to cancel cover in the event of an accident [telegraph.co.uk]
Re: (Score:2)
The solution to the fact that everyone makes mistakes driving is not to let everyone get away with it. It's to reduce the fines to the point where people who rarely make mistakes can afford it but people who make them constantly can't afford it (this also really requires adjusting fines to the driver's income, but that's a different matter).
The UK system is high fines, but low prosecution numbers. I've passed police cars doing 10MPH or more over the limit, as long as you're being polite and safe you're fine. Cops will only pull you over for doing things that are stupid and/or dangerous.
Re: (Score:2)
Interesting. You have a car that can accelerate from 55 to 100 quickly enough to leave 'a few seconds' to do something faster than the alternative, which would have taken 3 seconds?
Re:Police state (Score:5, Interesting)
Video editing and compositing is fantastic these days. All one needs is a database of make/model/year/color vehicles with videos of egregious driving and some Deep Fakes processing. Let's see how well the Sox do in the Series when their pitcher is pinched on a DUI.
dui needs an test to make it stick not an photo (Score:2, Redundant)
dui needs an test to make it stick not an photo
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>"Video editing and compositing is fantastic these days. "
I don't think the point of uploading videos is to actually CAUSE a violation or fine or anything, I am not sure that would even be legal (at least in the USA). But it could cast probable cause that could be used later if they are actually caught by the police doing something wrong that is similar. Or, it could act as evidence if the act was called in first, real-time, and the police were able to catch them doing whatever it was they were doing.
Re: (Score:2)
Video editing and compositing is fantastic these days. All one needs is a database of make/model/year/color vehicles with videos of egregious driving and some Deep Fakes processing. Let's see how well the Sox do in the Series when their pitcher is pinched on a DUI.
In the UK?
Re: (Score:2)
Video editing and compositing is fantastic these days. All one needs is a database of make/model/year/color vehicles with videos of egregious driving and some Deep Fakes processing. Let's see how well the Sox do in the Series when their pitcher is pinched on a DUI.
In the UK?
Finally, the term "world series" finally makes sense.
Re: (Score:2)
"However, everyone has done something stupid whilst driving at some point. Everyone has done something illegal, either on purpose or by accident."
So what? Pay the fine and try to do it better next time.
If you don't learn, then perhaps you don't deserve the privilege to drive.
Re: (Score:2)
Da! Comrade!
ve shud all be at de mercy of de state. Everyone should all be guilty of something because that way we can be locked up when it is politically convenient.
Making EVERYONE a criminal so that ANYONE can be "legitimately" charaged at anytime is what the communist dictatorships do (did). If rules/regulation make 100% of the population in violation of the law then those laws are not for public safety but to protect the government. That's not a road I want to drive down.
Re: (Score:2)
However, everyone has done something stupid whilst driving at some point.
Yes. And every stupid thing does not result in a fine. Have you never been given a warning?
Re: (Score:2)
Yes. And every stupid thing does not result in a fine. Have you never been given a warning?
By a police officer? No. I'm a foreigner and a man. If I get pulled over I get a ticket.
Not a Police state (Score:2)
This is a private run thing by dashcam brand "Nextbase" to try to sell more dashcams. The various police forces in the UK have nothing to do with this what so ever and are not likely to prosecute anyone over it as it's easy to call video evidence not taken by a an authorised officer into doubt.
I'm as concerned about this as I am about being shot.... which in the UK means I'm more concerned about Eastenders... which I never watch.
Re: Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
How will you feel when someone uploads a carefully edited clip that makes it look like you are a bad driver, when in fact you were avoiding an accident with someone else?
As ever, the problem with vigilante justice is the lack of due process and fairness.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
*Gasp* Complaints might be false and evidence might be incomplete or false? Why, no court system anywhere at anytime has had to deal with such insurmountable problems!
*Double gasp* Traffic court is run by vigilantes, and lack due process and fairness? Damn
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you have any idea how prosecution of driving offences works in the UK?
The police are regulated because they have been found do abuse traffic laws. The equipment they can use is regulated, the places they can operate are regulated, the way they can detect offences is regulated. And still there is abuse.
There is heavy pressure for you to settle the matter out of court. Pay your fine, go on an "awareness" course, don't fight it in court. If you do fight it, you need to pay for your own defence, and if you l
Re: (Score:2)
I have an idea that none of what you've described falls within the term "vigilante justice."
[Does not impress a driver in an American-rule jurisdiction in the least]
And a slippery slope fallacy...
None of wh
Re: (Score:2)
They have a point though - you don't need everyone to be out to get you for it to be a problem, just plenty of asshats willing to cause legal-system trouble for people at the touch of a button. (damned kids, foreigners, etc.)
If such a thing is done, it seems to me there should be real penalties for those abusing the system as well. Ideally something that gives the legal system incentive to see justice done and punish abuse. Perhaps something like - if you falsely report a traffic crime, then *you* pay the
Re: (Score:2)
Do you have any idea how prosecution of driving offences works in the UK?
The police are regulated because they have been found do abuse traffic laws. The equipment they can use is regulated, the places they can operate are regulated, the way they can detect offences is regulated. And still there is abuse.
There is heavy pressure for you to settle the matter out of court. Pay your fine, go on an "awareness" course, don't fight it in court. If you do fight it, you need to pay for your own defence, and if you lose also the court fees.
Defending yourself can be very tricky. The courts are corrupt and tend to side with the police unless you have extremely powerful evidence of your innocence.
I was with you up until here.
The courts in the UK are far from corrupt, it's just that the police do not prosecute until they have significant evidence. Otherwise they'd get in trouble for wasting court time.
People most often lose traffic ticket defences because they're most often guilty (also, have no idea how to defend themselves). If you can demonstrate your innocence it wont even get to court as you can take the matter up with the police and CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) directly and if you're e
Re: (Score:2)
The court's default position is to give a lot of weight to the word of police officers. Worse still, that weight seems to be given to police staff who are not officers, such as the people who operate the speed cameras.
More than that, the judiciary as a whole is supportive of this. It not only makes it very difficult for individuals to prove their innocence when confronted with the word of a police employee (which is taken to meet the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt"), but it also makes it extremely d
Re:Police state (Score:5, Interesting)
They don't actually have to bother with that. China's doing this now, they've got an automated system where users can upload cell phone video of you breaking a law. So then they'll do things like go out on the highways and drive just above the lower speed limit, block traffic, weave around, and generally incite people to speed around them to "get out of the way of that maniac", who is of course filming you breaking the law.
The reason it's a problem there though is they get PAID for the snitching. There's really no reason for that, people that are truly upset by lawbreakers will be more than happy to upload a video that may get them a hand-slap and reduce future occurrences, they don't need a monetary reward. Paying people to report this sort of thing on the other hand, is just insanely stupid because it just encourages people to incite lawbreaking. So lets hope the UK doesn't Do The Stupid and think about paying people for these reports.
Re: (Score:2)
1. Follow Chinese dashcam scammer with dashcam.
2. Video their illegal antics as they try and get others to break laws.
3. Snitch.
4. Profit.
Obviously wouldn't work for a foreigner, but for a Chink?
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed. It seems to me that if you are going to have such a system, and don't actually want to create a surveillance state or other abusive behavior, care should be taken to ensure the incentives are balanced against abuse. Such as - if you send in a false report, or actively incite lawbreaking, then *you* pay the same penalty that would have been levied against a real offender.
And those maniacs - sounds like the sort of behavior that should get reported by responsible drivers, doesn't it? Most of the be
Re: (Score:3)
Well when the inciter is being paid 20RNB and the passer is being fined 750RNB, the state profits 730RNB, why would they want to close the gold mine?
Re: (Score:2)
Hey I freely admit that my leading "if" was quite dubious. And certainly after the money train is rolling in it's going to be hard to convince anyone to change things. All the more reason for a supposedly free and democratic society to avoid setting the stage for such abuse right from the beginning - whether by having real penalties for abuse that keep the institutional incentives balanced, or by avoiding the whole can of worms altogether.
Re: (Score:2)
As ever, the problem with vigilante justice is the lack of due process and fairness.
This isn't vigilante justice, this is a database of evidence, nothing more. The normal justice system is still very much involved.
Re: (Score:2)
How will you feel when someone uploads a carefully edited clip that makes it look like you are a bad driver, when in fact you were avoiding an accident with someone else?
As ever, the problem with vigilante justice is the lack of due process and fairness.
I got three tickets in the last three months for exactly these types of things. I ride a bike so a quick squirt of the throttle on busy roads can get you into clean air and relative safety quite easily. But they'll never teach you that in the rule book.
Re: (Score:2)
I've got a problem with snitching services in general. Generally, in most countries you simply call 911 or the equivalent service and talk directly to the police in cases of "blatant reckless and life endangering driving" done it many times going down the 401 here in Ontario. You know the guy who nearly pushes another car into the ditch because they're on their cellphone. The guy going down the hammer lane so fast that when you're already 20 over the limit they make you seem like you're standing still.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Indeed - make it easy for the people who don't actually want to be driving to be chauffeured by competent, predictable robots, and traffic would be far easier to navigate. Unless of course the ease of being chauffeured significantly increased the amount of time people spent traveling, and thus the number of cars on the road.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
blatant reckless and life endangering driving should be reported and I'd be happy to assist in that.
Sure, it will be used for that. But extensions of government power never stop at the good use case. It will also be used to snitch on people drive 1 MPH over the limit, perhaps to avoid a dangerous situation. It will also be used to claim the ex was driving 15 MPH over the limit through contrived footage (every police reporting system is consistently used for revenge after breakups).
And the best part for the totalitarian state is that the state will accumulate a DB of such evidence on everyone. It will
Re: (Score:2)
I'm not in the UK, but I'm all for ratting out drivers who have no concern for my or my family's safety..
So how do you determine what is actually a safety risk? Based on what we already know of 100 years of road laws, wouldn't be a more accurate assumption that these will be used for revenue raising measures that only pay lip service to safety instead? OMG speeding!!! Think of the Children???
Re:Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, with the stupid shit I see on a daily basis while driving, I've begun thinking about buying a dashcam ... because if any of those idiots causes an accident I want some proof of their stupidity.
If citizens can send in "holy shit, look what this guy just did", then maybe the police can find the idiots responsible and ticket them (or charge them depending on what they've done).
I see an unbelievable amount of scary and dangerous stuff on the roads .. the ability to report that to the police seems natural.
I don't see this as a police state, but as a way for the information to be crowd-sourced because the police can't be everywhere.
Because when you see someone swoop across 4 lanes, cut 3 other drivers off, and then swoop back across two lanes because you have no idea where you're going ... someone is going to get killed if people drive like that.
Hell, open up the ability for me to take a picture of people talking on their cell phones and submit that. I can't tell you how many times I see people texting and driving -- I've even seen people with both thumbs on their fucking phone. I fail to see how a police officer can't stand at an intersection and just pick of dozens of people texting because they're so blatant about it.
Sorry, if you drive badly enough that someone wants to submit their dashcam footage to law enforcement, you deserve it.
Re:Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
I see an unbelievable amount of scary and dangerous stuff on the roads .. the ability to report that to the police seems natural.
Agreed. If I saw somebody committing an assault or breaking into a building I'd snap something on my camera and call the police. It would feel ludicrous to let the incident go unreported because I'd be snitching on somebody and promoting a police state.
Re: (Score:2)
Agreed. If I saw somebody committing an assault or breaking into a building I'd snap something on my camera and call the police. It would feel ludicrous to let the incident go unreported because I'd be snitching on somebody and promoting a police state.
The concern is that assaulting someone actually has a victim. Most road rules punish you for merely being in the same loose statistical group as someone else who did something wrong years ago. And the crazy part is that the penalties for this are now actually getting worse than the actual offending.
eg you can run someone over and kill them and if it's an accident you get off with a suspended sentence while others who merely speed (and don't crash) receive heavy fines and loss of license which can result in
Re: (Score:3)
Watch out! Internet tough guy alert!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The UK continuing in its steady descent toward a police state.
Uh, unlike a true police state, this system is voluntary.
This "police state", is whatever the citizens make it.
Re:Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, we can't have that. You must allow a minority of citizens to engage in any sort of dangerous driving so long as they are wise enough to avoid doing it in front of marked police. You also must ban other citizens from collecting evidence that might be used to punish an offender. Because police state...
Yep. Other citizens = secret police, traffic enforcement = arbitrary exercise of power, traffic court = star chamber acting in place of judicial organs exercising publicly known legal procedures.
It totally matches, by which I mean that you're simply butthurt that other users of the road can collect and now submit objective evidence of your asshattery so that you just might have to drive in a civilized manner.
Re: (Score:2)
Please tell me who is the victim in every other case... and why they are only a victim if the police witness it.
Re: (Score:2)
2 in 15 minutes is a grey area. 1, 'he's the asshole'. Everyone, 'your the asshole'.
If it was 2 every 15 minutes, clearly the GP is the asshole. But 2 once...not enough information.
GP do you drive a Volvo, Pius, leaf or Tesla? That would tip the scale to asshole, for sure.
Re: (Score:2)
Generally, misdemeanors are not pursued unless done right in front of the cops. Footage isn't even considered.
But footage of a street race? Some other traffic felony? You'll be testifying about how you got the footage.
Re: (Score:2)
CID Criminal investigation department
DSO Defence security officer
HOW Home Office Warrants
IPI Indian Political Intelligence
LIC Local Intelligence Committee
SLO Security Liaison Officers
Decades of collection, reports and reporting.
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
GDPR only applies to companies not individuals.
Wrong. Article 4 subsections 7 and 8 of GDPR:
(7) ‘controller’ means the natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which, alone or jointly with others, determines the purposes and means of the processing of personal data; where the purposes and means of such processing are determined by Union or Member State law, the controller or the specific criteria for its nomination may be provided for by Union or Member State law;
(8) ‘processor’ means a natural or legal person, public authority, agency or other body which processes personal data on behalf of the controller;
My Prediction.. (Score:2)
There will be an upswing of people baiting others into doing some stupid by intentionally intimidating them, then posting the result.
Doing a 'brake test' in front of someone in the fast lane, then when they underpass you and flick the bird, film it and post.
Drive at 20 below in the fast lane, and post videos of people underpassing, probably honking at you, and seemingly going 'much faster', even
though they may not be breaking the limit.
It is good to see the UK believes in both vigilante justice and unlimit
Re: (Score:2)
"Report that driver who cut you off. Fabulous prizes to be won!"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ahh yes, the cock suckers on the free way, 3 lanes wide driving next to each other, all doing 10 mph under the speed limit because they're too busy playing on their phone to drive.. How smart phones have ruined the roads... Imagine how few accidents there would be without cell phones. Vehicles have gotten magnitudes safer, yet there are still tons of senseless accidents..
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The legalization of weed I doubt made a big difference, maybe a small percent but not as much as cell phones would. most people that cant handle driving stoned wouldn't attempt it. And those that smoke and drive daily were doing it before legalization. The cell phones however, I cant drive more than 1 minute on the freeway of all places here in Las Vegas without noticing somebody on their cell phone. Not all are impeding traffic, but most are. And as far as surface streets.. HAH! i would say at least 50% of
Re: (Score:2)
You've already lost the argument as soon as you say "fast lane".
You're not allowed to go any faster in the outside lane then in any other lanes. It's just a lane.
There's laws forbidding people from overtaking other drivers on the inside. If you're going less than the speed limit you should probably move over to an appropriate lane to let past people who are doing the speed limit. That's common courtesy.
Paying attention to the road and other drivers will help you achieve this.
Re: (Score:2)
It is called the 'fast' lane because you are supposed to be there if you are maintaining a constant speed equivalent to the flow of traffic.
I will leave it up to you to interpret that as the local limit or the local normal speed of traffic, as local customs vary.
What it is NOT for is, as someone else, cruising along as 10 under the limit, at the same speed as another person who also is
quite happy in 'cruise mode' holding up other traffic that is in more of a hurry that you. THAT is why it is called the 'fas
Re: (Score:2)
It is called the 'fast' lane because you are supposed to be there if you are maintaining a constant speed equivalent to the flow of traffic.
No it is not called that. It is called a lane. In free, fast moving, traffic it is for overtaking. In still or slow moving traffic, that rule seems to be ignored. What does the Highway Code say?
Its also interesting to watch the common trick of undercover traffic officers sitting in the center lane doing 10 under, intentionally annoying traffic, and then speeding up to the limit as someone tried to underpass them, to push that person faster, and then give them a double ticket for both underpassing and speeding. Its quite a common trick around here.
That sounds like inciting someone to break the law. That is a criminal offence in most places. From what I hear though, this is a fairly standard mode of operation for the FBI in the USA, so guiding people into breaking the law may be legal there.
Re: (Score:2)
It is called the 'fast' lane because you are supposed to be there if you are maintaining a constant speed equivalent to the flow of traffic.
It may be called the 'fast' lane, but it is not. It is the passing lane. You should only be using it if you are passing another vehicle. Obviously, there are exceptions, such as heavy traffic or an upcoming (ie, less than a mile ahead) left exit. But as long as traffic is flowing normally, it should be used for passing and NOT cruising.
Re: (Score:2)
You've already lost the argument as soon as you say "fast lane".
No, because it is at least a suggestion everywhere that "slower traffic keep to the outside" implying that the inside lane is for faster traffic, thus the fast lane.You seem to be under the impression that everyone drives at exactly the speed limit or over all the time. However, some people drive slower than the limit and are supposed to be in the outside lane as to not hold up people driving faster than themselves.
Re: (Score:2)
If you're not going faster than the people in the right (inside) lane, you need to move your ass over ASAP to let past people who want to pass. That's common courtesy, and ought to be the law in places it isn't.
Fixed it for you.
Re: Finally, the Stasi can have their way! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
P.S. Try Germany one day.
I once made an entire car of Germans scream in terror because I did a slow, careful, U-turn in an empty road where it was perfectly permitted.
Apparently that's not "how it should be done".