seafood

I commute in NYC almost every day. Some days the smile doesn't leave my face for even an instant. But unfortunately there are those other days, when I run into some combination of close calls, road rage, or a total disregard for human life. I used to race motorcycles and don't mind being close to vehicles, so long as it's done safely. What gets me is when people drive like they have blinders on, refuse to take responsibility for any of their actions on the road, and authorities pay no mind or do likewise.

I'm not trying to paint with a broad brush. I've had positive experiences with truckers, car drivers, cops, and others. And hey, I am not perfect either. I can also understand that sometimes someone might do mess up genuinely by accident as a complete anomaly and even if it endangers me, I can't really blame them -- we're all human. No, those kinds of things aren't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about people willfully behaving negligently or with malice to those around them.

There was a thread about an example of this today. I've had similar experiences. I'm fed up. I do not want to key their cars, get into fights, scare them, or antagonize them. I want to hold them accountable. I am thinking about getting a helmet cam or perhaps something mounted on the bike. Have others here had positive experiences using cameras as either leverage in the road dispute on the spot or as evidence that gets submitted to authorities and leaves a paper trail?

dynodonn 

The information garnered from the videos taken by my bike mounted video cameras have aided me several times in being able to make an even more detailed report on aggressive/dangerous driving motorists. Though I don't expect any legal actions towards the motorist from the reports that I make to law enforcement, but like you said, it leaves a paper trail in case the same motorist is involved in a future incident regarding aggressive or dangerous driving.

SFCRetired

My only caution is to be fully aware of your state's laws concerning audio/video recording of others. On that point, it would be prudent to consult a lawyer concerning the legality of recording in public.
I carry, at all times, a digital voice recorder for other reasons. Eventually, I suspect that I will be compelled to acquire some small video device.

DX-MAN

Yeah, states differ on that; some have it right, others are ridiculous.

I remember while reading Walsh's last book on Armstrong, that Greg LeMond's input was questioned because some of it was recorded from a phone conversation without both parties' consent, as the law in MN requires. Sure, there's a reasonable expectation of privacy when on the phone. But I'll be damned if I can figure out how anyone can claim a violation of privacy when they're out in PUBLIC! About the only privacy violation I can think of while out in public happened in a small town some miles south of where I live; a store clerk had mounted both a mirror and a small camera on his feet to "upshot" underage girls wearing dresses. THAT'S a violation for SURE, but...out on the street, in your car or walking around? It's like trying to copyright what you say to someone on the bus.....

1nterceptor

There was this time when I was riding on a main street. Two way traffic with on lane of traffic for each direction
and cars parked on both sides. Bus couldn't pass me because I'm in the middle of the lane; away from the door
zone and people jumping out between cars. He also couldn't pass on the other lane since there was a steady flow
of cars from the oncoming lane. So what does he do? Starts honking at me. What do I do? Pull out my cellphone
and hold it in front of me pretending to videotape(riding a bike and actually trying to videotape is hard). Beeping
stops and when oncoming traffic stopped; bus driver moves over and passes with a wide margin.

Taping traffic can also be used against the one filming, say for example jumping the red light
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-rQN...6zPoymgKaIoDLA

seafood

Thanks to everyone for your feedback. I verified that camera use such as in cases of dashboard cameras in cars is not illegal here in New York and have procured one relatively inexpensively. We'll see how many technical kinks I'll have to work out from here on. As it happens, I was recently involved in an accident, where an oncoming car and and I collided when the other vehicle turned left in front of me, while I was also turning right into the same street. Luckily no one was injured and there was only minor damage to the car with no damage to the bicycle. Nevertheless, it was a close one and it would have been good to have a camera in that instance. Will update this thread with anything that might be helpful to others or just happens to be interesting as I begin to use the device and review recordings.

dynodonn 

I have numerous videos of motorists doing that very same maneuver at one particular T intersection that I would turn right at... no collisions though, since the potential for a left hook was high at that intersection, it made me constantly aware of them. Recently, this particular intersection has been made into an all way stop, lessening the left hook potential considerably.

Chris516

The state laws differ from one state to the next. In some states, both parties must be aware of the recording taking place. Whereas in other states, only the person recording, needs to be aware(obviously).

Here is a complete list, state-by-state: https://www.palmvid.com/content/suppo...recording.html

the_tool_man

That list is regarding audio recording, which is more strictly controlled. Video is much more widely allowed.

Number400

Nice link, thanks.

I am getting a 2 channel Camera/DVR setup for my car because all the crazy things I see on an almost daily basis. Not sure if I am going to spring for a bicycle setup as I am not quite back on the road yet.

Chris516

https://www.detectiveservices.com/201...ecording-laws/

dougmc

True.

There have been some cases where people openly recording their public interactions with cops have been arrested for their taping under the wiretap laws. As far as I know, every one of these cases has been thrown out -- either by the original judge or on appeal.

That said, even when you win (which is never certain), such cases tend to be expensive. The ACLU may offer to help -- but they may not, especially if there's something about you or the case that makes it unpalatable (such as you being an absolute jerk, etc.) You probably don't want to become your state's test case for such a thing if you can avoid it.

And yet audio is often as useful as video in such cases. You could disable audio recording, but that reduces the usefulness of your recording for certain situations.

The wise thing to do is probably to learn how your state (and adjacent states, if you go there often) handles such things, and then make an informed decision on what to do and how to handle it. Things to decide include how open you are about your recording, if you'll turn it off when requested to, if you'll disable audio recording or not, what you'll do with the video later, etc.

Also remember that the recording is recording what you do as well. So if you do get hit by somebody, or a cop arrests you for some bogus charge ... it is usually very much in your favor to not yell out insults after close passes, to be civil with the other party and not swear even if they do or they totally deserve it. Just be calm and collected when you deal with them.

That's good advice in dealing with people in general, but it counts even more when everything is recorded -- if you're calm and civil and the other person is a raving lunatic -- that's a good video to have.

B. Carfree

Maybe we just need some of these: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25197786
Of course, these would probably wreck havoc with bike computers too.

smasha

i've used video as:

• "notes" to file countless informal complaints (generally for things that police can't/won't prosecute - here in NZ there's a decent system for filing informal complaints),
• evidence for filing formal complaints (IIRC, only one of my formal complaints in the last 1-2 years didn't result in a successful prosecution, because the file was "misplaced" by police for a few months),
• once used as evidence in a civil case - i won ONLY because of the video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_h0vaPTcEY (full details in the video description)

as for NZ law, essentially there's no expectation of privacy in a public place: if you're in a place legally, it's generally legal to film from that place.
* https://techliberty.org.nz/can-you-ph...n-new-zealand/
* https://www.police.govt.nz/faq/what-...a-public-place
* https://techliberty.org.nz/wp-content...e-re-video.pdf
* https://techliberty.org.nz/wp-content...ing-police.pdf

every now and again, there are stories of NZ cops who don't have a clue... but they tend to involve two ********, one of which is in a police uniform (like most of the first-person YT videos of people "confronting" the police). most of the cops i've encountered here compliment the quality of my videos and/or want to know more about getting a similar setup.

seafood

This seems like a perfect example of why one would want the video with very little downside (equipment seems pretty affordable now and I don't mind having my riding on tape). How do folks who've dealt with this before go about submitting complaints if no traffic ticket is issued or the police are not already involved? I have seen some mentions of reaching out to fleet operators with evidence that identifies their drivers. I'll keep that in mind, but what I am most interested in is actually getting through to the authorities if at all possible.

After the incident I had with the left-turning car, I was waiting for the police to show up, when a bystander accused me of trying to extort insurance money. That could not be further from the truth. What I want the most is to create palpable negative consequences for drivers behaving in the ways we know is both illegal and damaging. Being able to proactively follow-up on video evidence, even without drivers' knowledge could be helpful.

dynodonn 

I feel that this bystander's response shows how a number of the general public feels about cyclists, if you were driving a motor vehicle at the time, I highly doubt that the bystander would have even made the comment at all.

Chris516

ditto!!

dougmc

I wouldn't jump to that conclusion. If the bystander thought that the vehicle that was going straight and hit the car really did break the law (running a red light?) and that the turning car was in the right, then they'd probably make this statement whatever the vehicle was. Such frauds certainly aren't unheard of.

I wonder, was this bystander the one who also told the police that he was a witness and the cyclist ran the red light? If he wasn't lying (and was just simply wrong instead) ... his statement should not be unexpected.

The video does perfectly show who was really at fault, however ...

I like how you edited the video, with the picture in a picture and the annotations -- nicely done. You make a strong case for recording everything.

I've put a dashboard camera in my car, it records all the time. It's nice because there's no maintenance -- it just records when the key is on. No need to charge batteries, remove it when I park the car (theft is a minor concern), erase memory, etc. I wish it was so simple on a bike.

I record on my bike too, but not all the time just because it's a pain in the butt ...

smasha

not surprising... my intentions for having cameras are pretty much identical to your stated reasons.

not something that i mind, but the downside is the PITA-factor. keeping the batteries charged, keeping the memory cards empty, archiving or deleting footage, taking the cameras on and off the bike, etc. if the cameras were free, a lot of people just wouldn't want to deal with that.

details vary by jurisdiction, but generally it starts with a formal complaint. it's exceedingly rare that police issue traffic tickets in non-injury cases, unless they witnessed what happened. the reason for this is simple: it's generally impossible to determine what happened, and who messed up. it's generally the case that both parties swear they did nothing wrong (NOTHING wrong! ever!), and the other party is 100% at fault. video solves that problem, but... police are happy to issue tickets to EVERYONE they can identify as violating the law. so it generally doesn't matter if you're just "a little bit wrong" and the other party is "a lot wrong" - in those cases were the police can identify a violation of the law (which is actually a big part of what they're paid to do) by both parties, don't be surprised if you both get tickets.

generally, i submit a formal complaint with a video DVD. i also include "raw" MP4 files in 1080p, 720p and 480p. last i heard, met police in london want 2 minutes before and 2 minutes after footage, when video of an incident is submitted. i just include the relevant bit of video, and mention that "door to door video is available on request". it's never been requested, but i do keep a copy until the case is disposed.

also, i make sure that formal complaint mentions twice (in both the essay section and the witness section) that "VIDEO DVD OF THIS INCIDENT IS INCLUDED WITH THIS COMPLAINT." then i get a written receipt that a complaint was made. that makes it harder for police to "lose" the video. a file number is never available at the time a complaint is filed, so if the police don't include a plate-number as a reference, i write it on the back of my receipt.

also, and this may be more relevant in NYC, is that if you're cited for a violation that you (a) didn't commit or (b) committed with reasonable justification, then politely accept a ticket from the cop, and use the video to challenge the ticket in court.

all of that said... my expectations of getting drivers cited depends largely on two factors: police motivation and police resources. in NYC, both of those are lacking. i'd be surprised if anything short of a significant injury (with a crash on video) is enough to get 1-2 hours of "investigation" required to issue a ticket. still, you've got "insurance" against a lot of things that can go wrong.

smasha

the exact same bias exists against cyclists (both bicyclists and motorcyclists), that anyone with a helmet camera is "just riding around looking for trouble." this is especially common after someone who doesn't understand the concept of "personal responsability" gets busted by a helmet-cam

repeat after me: would you say that about a driver with a dash-cam? would you say that about an airplane pilot with a black-box?

dynodonn 

When a meteor exploded over Russia earlier this year, it was shown on the nightly news all around the world thanks to videos provided by numerous dash cams. One major news network later wondered why so many dash cams were in use in Russia, only to discover that hit and run collisions as well as vehicle insurance fraud and traffic law enforcement corruption was rampant in Russia, making a number of Russian motorists to opt in videoing all their motor vehicle travels. If anything, at least a number of Russian motorists/bystanders would be more understanding in the fact that a number of cyclists here in the US and abroad have turned to videoing all their rides as well.

seafood

The Russian use of dash cams as a matter of course to provide hard evidence against hit-and-runs and fraud was what got me thinking about making video part of my regular commute routine in the first place.

dynodonn 

Long before I learned of Russians using dash cams, what got me thinking about videoing my commutes was in that I didn't have to chase down motorists in order to get a vehicle license number or description, or in letting certain motorists have a "free pass" when they used their vehicle's faster speed to let them get away with their dangerous driving habits.

smasha

the deciding factor for me was a road-rage incident (no one got hurt), after which i filed a formal complaint. police wouldn't do anything, since they've got nothing but "he said, she said". at first i thought it was anti-bicyclist bias, but then as i cooled off i realized the same rules apply when motorists clash... without "evidence", there's really nothing police can reasonably be expected to do.

it's not too often that i drive a MV these days, but when i do, i always put a gopro on the windshield with a suction-cup mount.

i say it all the time... cameras are an asset to good drivers/cyclists and a liability to bad drivers/cyclists.

every now and again on BF someone gets hit going through an intersection. both sides always say the other person went through a red light. too often, police issue a ticket against the bicyclist, even without any witnesses (except the driver who hit them, who is an adversarial witness, NOT an impartial witness) or physical evidence. that's another "worst case scenario" where video is invaluable.

CommuteCommando

My $0.02. I think the bigest benefit of a helmet cam is as a deterrent. I am all for mounting the camera to the helmet where is is very visible. First it takes care of the issue of covert recording. Second, seeing a camera, I am sure, will make a lot of people behave much better than they otherwise would.