In-Cab Video Cameras That Watch The Driver!!!!

Wasn't the Feds paying attention to Werner's paperless log system? Or was it a study? Or did the FMCSA just started looking at EOBRS by themselves without input by carriers? Oh that must just be some conspiracy. Building 7 just fell by itself...

 

And just like that, your credibility is gone. If you're an individual who believes in that kind of wacko BS then we're done here. No point in trying to hold a rational discussion with irrational people.

Come to think of it though, maybe you guys are right about all this. I mean after all about 7 years ago I was paid to participate in a study the FAA was conducting. As part of that study, I was required to fly some approaches into an airport in an airplane that had a bunch of difference sensors and whatnot installed. Among those, was a camera which faced the pilot and captured everything he or she did during the flight. Installing those cameras in every airplane wasn't really the focus of the study nor was it even mentioned. And yet, here we are 7 years later and every airplane flying today is required to have a camera installed which faces the pilot and records everything he or she does. So yeah, I guess you guys are right. I don't know I could have been so blind to it before. Thanks for showing me the light.

 

o, now building seven is a sore spot with me

the building miraculously fell down at 5pm because of an internal fire? give me a break

you dont even have the plane/fuel story to back that one up............but hey, only a tinfoil hat wearing, conspiracy theorist would even bother to question the official story

because 30 story buildings always implode after 6hrs of fire

back to our regularly scheduled cat and mouse fight

 

Always? Probably not. But sometimes? Especially shortly after two much larger buildings located in the immediate vicinity fell in under circumstances in which the resulting shock forces were in no way managed or controlled? Yeah, I'd say its entirely plausible. Sue me.

 

Oh yeah... My credibility is gone from you? A sheep? Another badge for me.

 

The real shame of this comment is that you have no idea how comical it is.

 

I am thinking that you do not fully understand concepts such as personal privacy or presumption of innocence. I don't care if I am in a company vehicle or not. If the company feels they cannot trust me, enough to feel the need to install a camera, then they should just fire me. Point it at me, and it means you don't trust me, and that you believe me to be guilty of something. And that blatantly shows I have no presumption of innocence with you. And I won't work for someone who doesn't trust me.

 

I think its you to doesn't understand the concept of personal privacy. Namely that you're not automatically entitled to it while you're being paid to perform a task.

 

I can't even get away from truthery nonsense anymore. If it's not "duh evil vaxxuhnashun" it's "duh gubmint did it".

 

I think the whole concept of cameras is to protect the carrier. It's all about legal issues.
If a driver has an accident, a camera will immediately cast aside any question of whether he/she was alert, playing with a phone, tuning the radio or any other distraction. Was the driver nodding off?
Even if this was the ONLY reason for the cameras, eventually, all good deeds are punished and we can generally assume the cameras will be used to 'spot check' the drivers for adhering to company policy.
I have no illusions of some pragmatic use of these cameras.
But we have continually (as a people in general) given up our individual rights in the name of security, safety or whatever else.
It's one more nail in the coffin, as far as I'm concerned.