mercer transportation

New cameras do not have audio, even with your own dash cams Mercer does not want you to run audio. In a few states it is illegal to record audio of law enforcement.

 

The PrePass issue had nothing to do the the "terrible safety score" someone mentioned, turns out when I got this truck somebody transposed two digits in my VIN when putting it in, and every time it was checked people reviewing the entry saw what they expected to see, not what was there. Very common in writing and proofreading. Eventually somebody caught it a month or two ago and I've been clearing the scales as normal now.

Glad to see you are doing well also, I guess between us we buy Kool-Aid by the pallet

 

What states is it illegal to record Audio and visual of law enforcement?...Because I know for a fact according to a federal appeals court ruling that it is perfectly legal under the first amendment to record officers in the course of their official duties

 

Cameras have saved my ### already. Woman drove into the side of my trailer (5mph or less) and NJ trooper wrote it up as my fault. Camera showed otherwise VERY clearly.

Marten driver hit my tractor THREE times trying to pull into a spot, I was in the restaurant and it was snowing. Did not notice damage to my hood til next morning 300 miles later when it warmed up. Marten denied that truck was even in the state. When they saw the video I immediately had a letter accepting all responsibility.

Of course half of these guys have an attorney on retainer and will sue, etc, all those stories. Nope, let the camera show the proof and mercer's claims people do the work. I'll sit back and drink my blue Kool Aid.

 

Very well said mtoo

 

Read again what I said, no mention of video only audio. Illinois was one of those states but I think the courts have finally ruled against the law. This is a contentious issue now with everyone using a phone to record interactions with police and the numbers of such persons are so overwhelming the cops can't do anything about it. Audio recording of a conversation in public can fall under eavesdropping laws, unlike video/photo which is accepted that if someone is in a public place there is no expectation of privacy. Somehow that has not universally extended to audio recording which to an extent I can understand. Laws are constantly changing and being challenged on the topic.

 

The Supreme Court has already ruled that in public there is no expectation of privacy… So that essentially covers any kind of recording in public

 

There is a difference in "expectation of privacy" laws between audio and video, but what do I know I've only also been a working photojournalist for 50 years (besides other things like trucking).

 

The Supreme court disagrees with you

 

Again the Supreme court disagrees with you and makes no distinction between audio or video recording.