Gizmodo
If you wanted a sure sign that the Orwell-ization of Great Britain is underway, then look no further than this. Lollipop ladies, those kindly old women who man the main roads next to school, similar to the US crossing guard, have been issued with video cameras to record lollipop rage—as school-side road rage is known.
The cameras, which record traffic coming from both the front and the back, mounted on the lollipop lady's cap, and attached to an Archos portable DVR, have been developed by a British firm, Routesafe. Several local authorities have invested in the technology to counter the increasingly aggressive behavior on British roads.
"It's unbelievable that we have to take this action," says the chairman of the Local Government Association's transport board, "but the lives of children are at risk from increasing numbers of drivers who are so selfish that they are willing to put lives at risk by refusing to stop for 30 seconds at a school crossing." Miscreants will be fined the sterling equivalent of $2,000 and be given three points on their licenses.
All of this raises the question: what is next for the CCTV state that Britain has become? I'm betting on Bathroom attendants with cameras to make sure you don't abuse the soap or toilet paper, and school dinner ladies with serving-spoon cams that make sure that "ver kidz" are eating their greens. [Daily Mail]
Comments
First, Wohoo!
@Jechro: Banhammer
I think shower cams is the next inevitable progression. You have to make sure that nobody is wasting water.
"I'm betting on Bathroom attendants with cameras to make sure you don't abuse the soap or toilet paper."
They already have this, all you need is 4.99, a credit card, and an internet connection.
The problem with this, or rather the lack of problem, is that little old lady mounted cameras are the obvious solution to the situation. If you really do have a large number of drivers racing through school stop zones a couple small cameras sounds like the ideal solution to me.
Where it gets tricky is when all these cameras get attached to some sort of central system and the oversight is not robust enough to prevent unwarranted access.
@strider_mt2k: Yep.
Sorry, Jechro—better luck with your next Giz ID!
@Jechro: Ugh.. Noob....
I don't think this is so much Orwellian as it is just plain sad that its come to this.
bloody hell. this is why I'd never EVER want to live in the UK. Australia is bad too... And the USA is getting almost as bad as both, what with the DHS wanting their fingers in EVERYTHING...
What is the deal with drivers today? Why is it that everyone seems to think that you can go 10 mph faster than a posted speed limit, pretend traffic laws are guidelines, and just generally be a menace behind a vehicle weighing thousands of pounds?
In all seriousness, drivers need to annually be forced to ride a bike or take the bus for a month out of every year so they get a perspective outside of their 'I am the center of the universe' bubble that happens behind the wheel of an automobile.
That said, good for you Granny! Get those crazy driving limey bastards!
I wish they had this where I live. I am appalled by the people I see speeding through the school zones and blowing right through a school buses lights (under state law, oncoming traffic is required to stop as well when a school bus is loading or unloading). It woudl provide legal proof to the courts where the MAXIMUM penalty should be handed down. To endanger myself speeding (I have) is one thing, to endanger children is completely unacceptable.
I see some reprehensible behavior when buses are stopping in my area.
Coupled with the Long Range Engine Cutoff Device it'll be perfect.
New retirement Plan for Grandma. Since metal poles are getting expensive, they replace 401k with Pole-01 k. Grandma FTW!
I thought all Brits were too polite to speed.
@Monty: Yes, this is a problem (I have somewhere to be damnit!), but constant video surveillance is not the answer. Drugs are a problem, but CVS isn't the answer.
Laws were meant to be kept, but you can't monitor the entire nation constantly because someone might be going 46 MPH. It opens doors that cannot be closed. The fact is the government enacts stupid laws every day (I'm only allowed to paint my house certain colors because its more than 60 years old... 60! not 100, not 200, 60.) If they start enforcing every law by video surveillance, we really will be living in 1984.
i dont even really see how this is a big deal, almost all major cities have cameras at intersections, this is pretty much the same thing, just on a person and for the purpose of protecting kids
@Monty: "Why is it that everyone seems to think that you can go 10 mph faster than a posted speed limit,"
Because you can, at least in PA. They're not allowed to give you a ticket for 10 or fewer miles over unless they got you on radar, and only the state bears are allowed to use radar, and they don't waste time on minor infractions when they have no shortage of people going 20 and 30MPH over. School zones are 15 MPH, and, at least in my area, people tend to do about 10, and if we saw anyone endangering a child, we would leap from our vehicles and beat the living crap out of them.
@Monty:
Actually speed limits are guidelines... sort of... Traffic laws are a state issue, and thus can varry from state to state. Some states have absolute limits, whereby it is unlawful to drive over the speed limit at any time, while other states have prima facie laws, whereby it is legal to drive over the speed limit if you can prove it was safe (if pulled over - such as flow of traffic).
Keep in mind, it can also be unlawful at times to drive the speed limit too :c)
@Rodime: I spent a month in Australia last year and other than the occasional well-marked speed camera along the side of the road I didn't see anything even remotely like what is apparently going on in the UK. I don't think you can really compare the two.
Given the sparse details in the article I think this use of video surveillance is perfectly fine. If drivers in the UK are willing to risk the safety of children and ignore these lollipop ladies then I'd be all for it. If I drove through an intersection here in the US where a crossing guard was helping people cross I'm sure I'd get pulled over if a cop witnessed it. If the situation is as bad in the UK as the article claims then they should definitely be doing something like this.
Ends: Applaudible
Means: Deplorable
@IphtashuFitz:
"If the situation is as bad in the UK as the article suggests"
The article is from the Daily Mail - our most stupid, tabloid, racist, overreacting paper the country has to offer!
Only white trash and idiots read the Daily Mail!
Maybe this will also help with over zealous crossing guards as well.
In my area during school hours you have to drive a certain speed. Even at this speed you have the crossing guards motioning for motorist to slow down, yelling and even giving the finger to the drivers, driving at the posted speed, while in the present of children.
I can see the Judge and Jury trying to follow the shaky video footage of these ladies attempting to focus their "hidden cams" onto the lciense paltes of the folks speeding thru the cross walks_
"Uh - your honor - may I be dismissed as the footage is giving me a headache?"
The Judge declares a mis-trial as he realizes he's now got a headache too_
@djheath: you read Giz - Giz quoted and showcased the Daily Mail....
.
I don't have a problem with this, but Ryan H makes a good point - if these are all connected to a central point it gives big brother a powerful eye. But this is atleast more practical then mounting cameras at every friggin corner.
@uberfu:
Lol... and I was just about to congratulate you for not posting a period...
douche.
@djheath: Thanks for the warning about the Daily Mail. I'll be sure to take anything coming from them with a HUGE grain of salt.
This reminds me a bit of the movie I saw last night, Freeze Frame where this guy was accused of murder, but he was innocent. Once he got off on the charges, he decided the best way to avoid being trapped by the Government was to record himself 24-hours a day. He had something like 6 cameras in his "house" (more like an underground fortress) plus he had a self-cam where the camera was attached to a bracket on a vest he wore. He archived his tapes hourly for ten years. Although he did it to cover his own @$$.
So the real question is this...
Who is going to sit down and WATCH all those videos?
note to self...lollipop rage: great band name
@Darrone: "The fact is the government enacts stupid laws every day"
What do you mean by "government"? Do you mean the National Government or do you mean local governments or both? Because your example is more of a restriction placed by a Homeowners Association and a condition you agreed to when you bought your house. You might want to look into the differences between laws and legal agreements.
There was another version of this on the news earlier - they have the cameras in the poles.
It's not the cameras that are the problem though - it's the idiot drivers who seem to think that speeding/abusing people is a good idea. Stuff the 1000quid fine - they are not fit to drive - they should have their license revoked.
Laws exist for a reason. By speeding you are still breaking a law. What if I decide to break the law that says I cannot steal your car? Don't like that do we?.
Also, the local lollypop lady is a menace - the number of cars who get hit with the pole as she turns around whilst stood on the pavement is amazing.
-end-rant-
@sparx104:
Felony != Misdemeanor
I'd rather have people driving a few miles over the speed limit than stealing each others cars. Driving over the speed limit does not always equate to unsafe driving. And as my original post (Rabid Penguin) stated it is not always against the law to drive over the speed limit.
Why would anyone be so paranoid about public cameras? The keyword here is "Public". You know. Places where cops would normally patrol anyway. So what if you're being recorded. No one is going to care if you get caught shifting your gears. Like what Mitch said, no one will have enough time to watch all those videos; it's mainly used to track suspects. If you believe you're a suspect, then you know you've done something wrong and you might as well turn yourself in.
@Rabid Penguin:"And as my original post stated it is not always against the law to drive over the speed limit.
I'm afraid it is always against the law to drive faster than the posted speed limit. You might not get a ticket for it and it may be the safest way to drive at the time, but it is always illegal.
Undoubtedly, this is like a surveillance camera in a grocery/convenience/retail store. The only time the camera will be looked at is if there's an incident. It seems more likely they have a recording unit they switch on when they start their shift. If something happens, they can log the incident, send in the tape, and replace it.
To be fair about crosswalks versus buses tho, a crosswalk will only impede you for about 30 seconds as people cross the road. If you stuck behind a school bus however I can understand people getting impatient having to stop every 65 seconds and wait for those slow ass schoolkids to get off their bannana buses.
I would never try to get the jump ona schoolbus though
@Rabid Penguin: Even if felony is not the same as misdemeanor, both are still defined as breaking the law. The only difference is in severity.
Allow me to be the childless Grinch on this one. While I agree that it is important to stop cars for school busses and kiddie crossings, those lil' runny-nosed bastards really need to start walking with a sense of purpose if we're going to stop traffic for 'em. There are times when I'm stuck behind a school bus that I can be close to ten minutes late to work.
There is a 3 mile road that I take to work, and the bus stops 15 times on that road so that the butterballs don't have to walk in excess of 100 yards to get to a stop (some of the stops are well under 100 yards apart), and the bus driver won't pull onto a side road so that traffic doesn't get mangled. To add onto the problem, many of the kids wait in their houses until the bus pulls up, and then they leisurely stroll to the bus stop, while the bus driver patiently waits for them - traffic stopped - instead of driving off to teach the kids that the world doesn't revolve around them (houses are in the $1 mil range, and their shit-don't-stink parents would probably get the bus driver fired if their little darlings had to face the indignity of missing the bus). I understand that your children are the most important thing in the world to you, but they're just small, absent-minded humans to me (and you won't see a bus or train waiting for a tardy businessman).
I agree that children need to be protected, but they also need to be aware of the fact that negative actions have negative consequences. You're running late - you're going to miss the bus.
If you want to drag ass to get to the bus, the driver should leave you. Why should I have to be late to work so that you can drag ass to get to the bus.
Oh, and Bah Humbug (followed by some other grumpy-old-man expressions too)
Stay off my lawn, you little shits!
@Pluton: I got a good chuckle out of that one.
It could be a brilliant idea. Replace all those pole mounted cameras that are vulnerable to vandalism with old ladies.
@ripfire4:
True, but speeding does not negatively impact someone else's liberties. Unless driving unsafely, but speeding does not always equal unsafe driving. Felonies do negatively impact someone else's liberties (destruction/stealing of personal property, bodily harm, etc). Again, speeding is not always against the law (depending on state and situation).
And even though it's technically public property, setting up cameras as permanent fixtures for 24-hour surveillance is a little disconcerting.
@Curves:
If we're going to nitpick about not endangering the children, one might point out that children might be in the vehicles near you while you're speeding. It's a bit self-centered to say that speeding doesn't endanger the people around you.
@Munch: LOLZ. I can't believe the kids get to wait in the house instead of at a general bus stop.
When I was going to school, if you missed the bus, you were SOL. And we had newspapers for shoes.
@Rabid Penguin: Actually in actuality, while prima facia laws exist in Ohio as well, it is bidirectional - if you are going above what is deemed a safe and reasonable speed for the prevailing conditions, you will get a ticket.
It is actually much more uncommon to successfully overturn a speeding ticket because the conditions were so nice that the speed limit was superceded by a prima facia law. Possible, but rare. The negative is much more common.
@Jechro: [weeping] We hardly knew ye. Thank goodness.
@Curves: Unless it's a divided highway / road. Then oncoming traffic does not have to stop, because buses by law are not allowed to have their passengers cross divided roads.
@Darrone: and Darrone drags out the "slippery slope" fallacy! Woo Hoo! Get your critical thinking hats on, class.
Not every law enacted is stupid. Not every additonal video camera is necessarily a threat to your civil liberties. Mother's milk does NOT lead to heroin.
If you are doing things that you are ashamed of, then of course you won't like cameras.
@Munch: Wow, that's funny stuff! I sure hope your tongue is in your cheek.
'cause otherwise it belongs in a Cuisinart.
I'm jus' sayin'.