Trooper recommends dash cameras

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by jeepman3071
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I recommend against dash cams because they can always be used as evidence against you and if you, in a panic, decide to taper with the camera because of an accident where you're at fault you can also be charged.



That's ridiculous. I worked as an auto claims adjuster and I can 100% verify that dash cams help more than hurt. The only ones who should be afraid are those who cause accidents to begin with.

You can also turn off the "show speed" option. Neither of mine show the speed on the camera while recording.


You don't know that, because you don't know the number of times a dash cam wasn't disclosed. Take a "holier than thou" driver who "brake checks" another driver causing a rear end collision. Point being is that I can see situations where the camera "disappears" when the accident doesn't look favorably on the driver.



I never had a claim where someone was forced to show dash cam footage. On the insurance side, usually it comes up as "oh I also have a dash cam showing the footage of the accident, let me send you that footage". If someone is worried enough about getting a dash cam because they feel it might reveal things they have done, they need to take a look at their driving. I'm sure my dash cam shows a lot of things I wouldn't want insurance companies to see, but it also loop records every 5 minutes so after a day of driving it starts writing over itself.

 

[jeepman3071]

Originally Posted by 69GTX
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
You don't know that, because you don't know the number of times a dash cam wasn't disclosed. Take a "holier than thou" driver who "brake checks" another driver causing a rear end collision. Point being is that I can see situations where the camera "disappears" when the accident doesn't look favorably on the driver.


Regardless if someone "brake checks" you, it's hard to prove they did it on purpose. They could have hit the brake by mistake, had a leg cramp, reacted to a spider in the car, etc. The fact that you were following too close and hit them IS the issue. You'll be declared mainly at fault for following too close for the speed. Even if they lock them up....you should be far enough back to avoid them. Like you said earlier, 1 sec for every 10 mph should give you plenty of reaction time.



Depends on the situation actually. For example, CT is one of the states where if you hit someone from behind you are technically at fault. A dash cam has changed this many times though, because instances of road rage where it is clear someone intentionally cuts in front of you and slams on the brakes, the fault is on the other driver for intentionally causing an accident. Which FYI for all the brake checkers out there: if insurance finds out you intentionally caused an accident, it is usually not covered by the policy, and the company will likely drop you.

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by KrisZ
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by jeepman3071
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I recommend against dash cams because they can always be used as evidence against you and if you, in a panic, decide to taper with the camera because of an accident where you're at fault you can also be charged.



That's ridiculous. I worked as an auto claims adjuster and I can 100% verify that dash cams help more than hurt. The only ones who should be afraid are those who cause accidents to begin with.

You can also turn off the "show speed" option. Neither of mine show the speed on the camera while recording.


You don't know that, because you don't know the number of times a dash cam wasn't disclosed. Take a "holier than thou" driver who "brake checks" another driver causing a rear end collision. Point being is that I can see situations where the camera "disappears" when the accident doesn't look favorably on the driver.


Isn't it the decision of the camera owner wether or not they choose to use the footage as evidence?



From a legal perspective I believe the camera owner is supposed to disclose it so I would want to avoid having to make that decision. That's my only reason for not wanting one. IIRC some countries require a dash cam either by law or the insurance companies require it in order to obtain coverage. I can also see active OBD monitoring becoming a requirement for coverage or by law.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I recommend against dash cams because they can always be used as evidence against you and if you, in a panic, decide to taper with the camera because of an accident where you're at fault you can also be charged.

How bad do you drive?


I'm a safe driver but not necessarily the slowest. Besides nobody is perfect as I suspect 99% of the poster on this board routinely follow too close* especially when commuting to/from work.

* 1 car length for every 10 mph.


If you've read any of the more recent driving tests (at least in Indiana) it is no longer 1 car length for every 10mph. It is 2 seconds behind, which means at 65mph it is roughly 190' using the 2 second rule vs. about 105' using 1 car length per 10mph. Two things immediately pop out from that: 1. Almost nobody follows that rule of thumb even remotely close; and 2. There would be many fewer rear-end accidents with an additional 85' to react and stop the vehicle, or move and avoid it if you can't stop.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl


From a legal perspective I believe the camera owner is supposed to disclose it so I would want to avoid having to make that decision. That's my only reason for not wanting one. IIRC some countries require a dash cam either by law or the insurance companies require it in order to obtain coverage. I can also see active OBD monitoring becoming a requirement for coverage or by law.


Wouldn't that be self incrimination?

 

[BMWTurboDzl]

Originally Posted by KrisZ
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl


From a legal perspective I believe the camera owner is supposed to disclose it so I would want to avoid having to make that decision. That's my only reason for not wanting one. IIRC some countries require a dash cam either by law or the insurance companies require it in order to obtain coverage. I can also see active OBD monitoring becoming a requirement for coverage or by law.


Wouldn't that be self incrimination?


Or evidence tampering? Depending on local laws view it. I can imagine a situation where dashcams become so commonplace that local ordinances require disclosure of such recording device in the event of an accident.

 

[KrisZ]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by KrisZ
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl


From a legal perspective I believe the camera owner is supposed to disclose it so I would want to avoid having to make that decision. That's my only reason for not wanting one. IIRC some countries require a dash cam either by law or the insurance companies require it in order to obtain coverage. I can also see active OBD monitoring becoming a requirement for coverage or by law.


Wouldn't that be self incrimination?


Or evidence tampering? Depending on local laws view it. I can imagine a situation where dashcams become so commonplace that local ordinances require disclosure of such recording device in the event of an accident.


Well, I don't know about that. I'm no lawyer, but I'm pretty sure you have to be notified by a lawyer it a court that there is a pending investigation and that you should preserve any evidence relevant to the case. You should be notified of the case number etc.

My previous company was going through some litigation and my department was apparently involved. The email from the company lawyer clearly stated when they were notified of the lawsuit and that all emails and data has to be preserved.

If no such notification is given, you are not expected to preserve the data.

 

[PimTac]

Originally Posted by SubieRubyRoo
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I recommend against dash cams because they can always be used as evidence against you and if you, in a panic, decide to taper with the camera because of an accident where you're at fault you can also be charged.

How bad do you drive?


I'm a safe driver but not necessarily the slowest. Besides nobody is perfect as I suspect 99% of the poster on this board routinely follow too close* especially when commuting to/from work.

* 1 car length for every 10 mph.


If you've read any of the more recent driving tests (at least in Indiana) it is no longer 1 car length for every 10mph. It is 2 seconds behind, which means at 65mph it is roughly 190' using the 2 second rule vs. about 105' using 1 car length per 10mph. Two things immediately pop out from that: 1. Almost nobody follows that rule of thumb even remotely close; and 2. There would be many fewer rear-end accidents with an additional 85' to react and stop the vehicle, or move and avoid it if you can't stop.





That two second rule is subject to a lot of interpretation. A car length is easier to judge. But, in this day and age with smart braking and radar controls, the distance can be adjusted and people hope the technology keeps them off the rear end of the car in front. Sad to see but more and more drivers are not using either method to space themselves properly.

Not too long ago we had a heated thread on this particular subject.

 

[PimTac]

Some dash cams also record conversations in the vehicle. That is another can of worms.

 

[SubieRubyRoo]

You can turn off the sound on my cam.

 

[Gimpy1]

When I was an insurance adjuster these cameras where just starting to get popular and affordable. As an adjuster I had to take recorded statements from all involved parties and witnesses, and based on the info presented make a liability determination. about 80% of the time all I had available where the statements, points of impact, and sometimes pictures of where the accident took place and or the police report. It is very difficult to make liability decisions with such limited data, and we also took int account that a police report was also based on statements from the involved parties, dash cams remove the uncertainty, If more folks had dash cams it would have made accurate liability decisions so much easier and faster, it also makes proving fraud, much easier. I haven't gotten one in my car yet, but after many close calls here in Mexico city, I will be getting one for each car, next time I'm in the US. I look at it this way the cost of the camera is easily offset by the savings you can get by proving you aren't at fault, and thus not increasing your insurance premiums.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I recommend against dash cams because they can always be used as evidence against you and if you, in a panic, decide to taper with the camera because of an accident where you're at fault you can also be charged.

How bad do you drive?


I'm a safe driver but not necessarily the slowest. Besides nobody is perfect as I suspect 99% of the poster on this board routinely follow too close* especially when commuting to/from work.

* 1 car length for every 10 mph.

If you're following too close and rear end someone you're going to be at fault camera or not. I'm not seeing the downside of a camera unless you routinely blow through stop signs and red lights, or drive aggressively. I'd much rather have the footage showing I'm not at fault vs trying to cover my rear when I caused a crash. I've been in one fender bender in almost three decades so my experiences may differ.

 

[SirTanon]

Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
Originally Posted by hatt
Originally Posted by BMWTurboDzl
I recommend against dash cams because they can always be used as evidence against you and if you, in a panic, decide to taper with the camera because of an accident where you're at fault you can also be charged.

How bad do you drive?


I'm a safe driver but not necessarily the slowest. Besides nobody is perfect as I suspect 99% of the poster on this board routinely follow too close* especially when commuting to/from work.

* 1 car length for every 10 mph.

If you're following too close and rear end someone you're going to be at fault camera or not. I'm not seeing the downside of a camera unless you routinely blow through stop signs and red lights, or drive aggressively. I'd much rather have the footage showing I'm not at fault vs trying to cover my rear when I caused a crash. I've been in one fender bender in almost three decades so my experiences may differ.

I agree 100%.

IMHO, if someone says the actively do not want to use a dash cam, or complains about others using them, it's because they have something to hide, usually bad driving habits.

Heck, I've seen enough Dash Cam compilation videos on YouTube to realize that there are a ton of people with awful driving habits that not only use dash cams, but actually willingly upload videos of themselves driving badly.

 

[madeej11]

How are these cameras affected by extreme cold and heat, anybody know?

 

[SirTanon]

Well, I live in Phoenix, and the camera stays in my car, even in the summer, when ambient temperature goes over 115 many days per year (sometimes up to 120F). When it gets this hot, the inside of the car can get over 140F easily. I've had a couple dash cams in my car during this time, and they've done fine. The only reason I replaced the first one was the suction cup lost suction one day and it fell off the windshield and damaged the little screen.

They issue usually seems to be with the batteries inside them (or the suction cup for those with suction cups). Using a cam that utilizes a capacitor instead of a battery seems to help a lot.

 

[EA82]

Give it a couple of years and they will come standard on all vehicles.

 

[madeej11]

Originally Posted by SirTanon
Well, I live in Phoenix, and the camera stays in my car, even in the summer, when ambient temperature goes over 115 many days per year (sometimes up to 120F). When it gets this hot, the inside of the car can get over 140F easily. I've had a couple dash cams in my car during this time, and they've done fine. The only reason I replaced the first one was the suction cup lost suction one day and it fell off the windshield and damaged the little screen.

They issue usually seems to be with the batteries inside them (or the suction cup for those with suction cups). Using a cam that utilizes a capacitor instead of a battery seems to help a lot.

Thanks for the reply Tanon. I think if they can withstand that extreme heat then the same should apply for the cold.I have an Ultragauge mounted on my dash and I use a sunshade when parked in summertime and a thermal glove in the winter. So far so good after two years.

 

[Revving2Redline]

Sounds like Kellogg in Wichita lol

 

[peejaycruiser]

I used mine today for road rage against me. Had a car go around a corner in my lane gave them a blast of the horn and told them to stay in their own lane. Pulled up at the lights and he gets out stomping up to the car sticks his head in abusing me then gives me a smack and kicks the door, all with the camera turned in his direction. The funny thing apart from not realizing he actually hit me, was when he kicked the door he barely left a mark but he popped a small dent out that was in the door already. Have to give the footage to the cops but going on the the 19 years, last 4 in particular I'm going to be told they can't find him or the driver won't identify him, and there's nothing they can do.

 

[hatt]

Originally Posted by peejaycruiser
I used mine today for road rage against me. Had a car go around a corner in my lane gave them a blast of the horn and told them to stay in their own lane. Pulled up at the lights and he gets out stomping up to the car sticks his head in abusing me then gives me a smack and kicks the door, all with the camera turned in his direction. The funny thing apart from not realizing he actually hit me, was when he kicked the door he barely left a mark but he popped a small dent out that was in the door already. Have to give the footage to the cops but going on the the 19 years, last 4 in particular I'm going to be told they can't find him or the driver won't identify him, and there's nothing they can do.

Around here he would be easy for the cops to find. Lying in the road with bullet holes.