Oxford City Council Mandates CCTV Cameras In Taxies by 2015
First time accepted submitter Beowulf878 writes "In yet another data-collection feast by the government in the UK, a local council has proposed fitting at least one CCTV camera per taxi to record every conversation. Obviously the reason given is our own safety. Thoughts?"
Here in Ottawa, we've had cameras in taxis for a while. I have no idea if anything has come of it, other than the added expense for each taxi owner of a possibly useless camera. Seems to me like the camera supplier is in bed with the city councillor...
-Billco, Fnarg.com
CCTV cameras have been fitted to taxis in Sydney for several years now at the request of the drivers. The hope is that this deters robberies. Does it work? I have never seen any figures - does anyone else know? They have also been fitted in State Transit buses with newer buses having a least three. In this case while it does not deter theft or assault it does lead to convictions. Also some entertaining reality TV on the news each night.
Every cab/limo in NYC has a camera in it.
So this is one city in the UK as compared to -
The whole of Australia already has this.
As does New Zealand
As do Toronto and Winnipeg
NYC requirees either a camera or a partition.
Yellow Cabs in houston also have them.
This is to stop cab drivers getting robbed and murdered, not to spy on who is going where.
They've been compulsorily fitted to taxis in New Zealand since August. Taxi companies fitted them at their own expense. Drivers are saying they feel safer, and the industry is claiming the amount of abuse against drivers have dropped and the cameras have directly led to arrests, including for several very serious incidents. Despite the camera systems costing upwards of $1000 per vehicle, the drivers are saying it's money well-spent.
So please ignore the cynicism of the Slashdot submitter & editor - they evidently do improve driver safety.
The rioting had nothing to do with the fact that the police are dangerous. The rioting had everything to do with the fact that criminal scum wanted free stuff.
75% of the people arrested as part of the riots so far had previous convictions. Around 20% had more than 10 previous convictions. These were not law abiding citizens fighting the man.
This is an action by one local council, probably trying to make some sort of political statement. Councils of this level are very low-powered in this country and frequently full of jumped up jobsworths who want to be important.
It is highly unlikely this will come to anything: notice the comment in TFA by the Information Commissioner's Office that the plans are "highly intrusive and unlikely to be justified". (For those outside the UK: The ICO is our central, national-level oversight body for things like data protection and freedom of information.)
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.