Camera's are coming to a truck near you or Yours.

I don't know too many drivers arguing about forward facing cameras. The controversy is the cameras facing the drivers.

Any post-wreck guilt or innocence can be shown with forward facing cameras. Either the truck was where it was suppose to be or it wasn't. -- no driver facing camera needed for that.

 

Not true. There is a driver in the southwest somewhere (Arizona?) sitting in prison right now because his driver facing camera helped prove that he was looking at Facebook on his phone when he mowed down a state trooper.

 

It may have sensationalized the wreck, but it wasn't needed to prove guilt. Phone records show what he was doing. Plus, the FORWARD facing camera shows there was no excuse for plowing into that cruiser.

 

Any company who needs to install cameras facing the driver should re evaluate their hiring practices & standards

 

All the more reason any rational person would want it there to prove their innocence.

 

What are you talking about?

That driver could have been sitting up, wide-eyed with perfect posture, both hands on the wheel, and looking forward when he plowed that cruiser. There is nothing the driver facing camera could have recorded to show innocence on the drivers part.

Your driver facing camera can record you executing an otherwise flawless textbook lane change. --signal, check mirrors, easy over, checking mirrors, etc. But if you creme a 4 wheeler up against the guardrail, you are still at fault regardless of how good you looked on camera.

 

That's because that driver WAS guilty. Duh.

You're going to believe what you're going to believe so there's no point in arguing. All I know is what I've seen and heard. And what I've seen and heard is that for the companies currently using these systems, the footage ends up proving the innocence of the driver FAR more often than guilt.

 

Where have you seen driver facing video that proved innocence? -- I'm talking video of the DRIVER that proved their innocence. I'm interested in seeing that.

 

True and I never said otherwise. They could easily afford the hardware if they wanted to. My argument is why would they want to? Their ability to afford the expense is irrelevant. There still has to be a measurable benefit for every cost and the cost to benefit ratio simply isn't there on this.

The bandwidth cost for on-demand over the air video from every truck would be astronomical even with bulk discounts. The cost to benefit simply isn't there. I mean lets face it, if these companies are looking for a reason to fire drivers, they don't need live video in the trucks to do it. So what benefit could they possibly get to justify the astronomical cost? I can't think of any.

And again, why would they want to do that. What exactly are you doing constantly in rush hour traffic that would cause your company to fire you or ding you if they saw? And what exactly are you doing in your bunk that you think is so fascinating that anyone at your company would have least bit of interest in watching? Also how much do cameras cost that can see through bunk curtains?

Oh I'm quite sure you're not the only driver capable of thinking of those things.

 

On the cell phone of a regional manager at a company currently using one of those systems.