Discussion in 'Advice' started by iUBERdc, Jan 4, 2017.
Both parties decided not to sue each other.
No it doesn't.
Yes it is. And this isn't wiretapping.
I love living in the Commonwealth of Virginia, one-party concent state and guess what I know that I'm recording hehe
I have never seen a red warning speed dot, what is it?
Thank god I don't live in the hell hole that is California. Freedom abounds in Virginia, the home of the NRA. Bought my handgun easily and can carry it almost anywhere for my protection. Can record almost anywhere for your safety. Must be why Virginia is one of the safest states in the union. The dangerous freaks seem to always stay on the other side of the river in Maryland and the Capital of your Nation
Those are the Good houses to rob.
The ones with a sign saying they have something to protect.
If the signs are posted in an obvious place for the passengers to see and they enter my car, they are in fact consenting to being video/audio taped.
Yes, it does. That's what "two-party consent" means.
Dash cameras obviously can make a visual record of the road ahead, but under state law, they must also be capable of recording and saving audio data. Because this requirement raises privacy concerns, you must post a notice in a visible place in your car that notifies passengers that their conversations are being recorded. The owner or lessee of the vehicle can turn the device off at any time. The information stored on the recorder belongs to the owner as a matter of law.
I have two cameras running on me and my passengers frequently notice and ask questions. I always say that they are there to protect us both from false accusations from either of us and that they are streaming to offsite. That last part is bogus, but I think it has saved me from a couple of dicey situations.
Yea i lie and say my video is being uploaded to the cloud. Most, unless they know their dash cameras, won't know that's not a common feature...
Does that mean I can get a ride if I don't have pants or underwear? It's not on the list of rules.
It is more effective than nothing. It is less effective than actually HAVING video and audio surveillance.
lol I guess so, we should all do that for uber pool requests, that'll stop them, and make them request X.
Passengers are taking a ride in your private vehicle. There should be no expectation of privacy on their part. None. Whether they see the camera or not and whether they see the "sign" or not. None. My experience has been that this will suffice in court.
"The chance of a slice of bread falling buttered side down onto the floor is inversely proportional to the cost of the carpet."
No nothing MOFOS!!! Easier I think..
Uh no. You are mixing and matching laws.
The key term you are missing for this issue is reasonable expectation of privacy.
The Taco Bell clown will lose his civil suit. Hands down.
It has little effect on drunk people.
The drunks will act up right into the camera because they are not thinking of the consequences.
I have signs posted that I am video and audio recording in my vehicle. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
Massachusetts is two-party consent state also but I've had a lawyer say that 1. there is no expectation of privacy in a ride sharing vehicle and 2. they see the red light flashing and are instantly made a where of it. I use a Go pro plus a dash cam facing outwards.
Separate names with a comma.