Subject: Re: Re: Re: Re: Security Cameras v. Shields
Name: Steve
Date Posted: Aug 8, 06 - 8:09 AM
Message: I'm a driver who has considered putting a camera in my cab. From the research I've done, it seems that those drivers in other cities who have used cameras have found them to be a successful deterrent against crime. However, I think there are some interesting points to be mentioned on both cameras and shields.
1. Despite the fact that shields do cut down on passenger legroom and driver comfort, they also act as a physical barrier against an attacker's weapon. A camera can't stop a knife from coming at a driver's throat; it can only capture the attack on tape in the hopes of catching the attacker.
2. That being said, in my experience, most drivers don't close their shields, thus effectively negating their purpose.
3. Like I said, those drivers in other cities who do use cameras say they have been successful. Numbers don't lie - in cities like Toronto and San Francisco where cameras were mandated, crimes against drivers have decreased.
4. Mary is right - cameras would be a better way to stop non-violent crimes against drivers, such as fare-jumping. Also, a camera could be used as evidence to settle a dispute between a driver and a passenger.
5. Cameras are located everywhere these days and crimes still happen. If someone has decided to rob you, they will whether you have a shield or a camera.
6. What about privacy, both for drivers and passengers? Do we really need "Big Brother" watching us in another place? When do we stop being on tape?
7. In a discussion on this forum about media bias, someone mentioned that violence against drivers rarely makes the papers. Perhaps that's because the attackers are rarely caught? If a driver is attacked and the attacker is captured and punished because of video tape, that could send a message to others thinking of committing a similar crime against a cabbie and that message would be: "If you attack a cabdriver, you will be caught and you will be punished." That could be the best crime prevention of them all! The minute drivers stop being portrayed as "easy targets" and "helpless victims," that's when drivers will start to be safe.
Excellent posting! Thanks for finding this.
George
I think that drivers should have a choice whether or not they want a cab with a camera or a shield. The problem is that if I prefer a shield to a camera, or vice versa, the one I want might not be available.
The bigger companies can go with a percentage of the fleet having a camera and the rest having a shield but that isn't going to guarantee that a driver who shows up will get the safety device he wants. How do you solve that?
Ralph
Good question Ralph. The question is why change what is currently working well for us?
Is it working well for us? Most cabs in Chicago have shields and yet we have been hearing more about attacks on taxi drivers more than ever.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Good question Ralph. The question is why change what is currently working well for us?
Are you in BensonHurst or Chicago sir? There were always murders of REAL Chicago cab drivers. Now the only ones I have heard being killed are the illegal non medallion ones. Mr. Cramden, will taking the shields out make the crime rate against drivers go down?
*** Huuummm..!! Real Good Question Sir.However, I find myself wondering how this notion of having to make a " CHOICE " came to be.??? Why not BOTH a camera
and a safety shield / partition / bandit barrier ect.?
Crime Prevention Thru Enviormental Design must be a " PACKAGE "deal.Back in May of 2000, OSHA put out a " Fact Sheet / White Paper " making 10 recommendatios..NOT JUST ONE ( 1 ).** REPEAT..10.Many city's mandate BOTH a camera & safety shield...a prime example ( and they have STATS to prove the effectiveness ) is Winnepeg, Manitoba.!!!! A " SHINING EXAMPLE " of a Crime Prevention Package.BTW - ALL of the cab co's in the USA recieved a copy of OSHA's fact sheet ( approx.7,338 of them )..BUT, very few co's followed the recommendations.WHY ?..F..... MONEY.!!Safety On The Job Cost's MONEY..so do funerals, hospital bills.....WELL..U get my point.RIGHT.? How about IF we all take another look @ OSHA's recommendation & discuss THAT.?? Now, 4 THE RECORD = there is NO cure all, NO 100% safety....the ONLY way would be to ' ELIMATE CRIME '.!!Negligence / GROSS NEGLIGENCE on the part of the cab co.owners was the MAJOR TOPIC of a TLPA Newsletter ( "Dispatch" )( for members ONLY )a while back.Ask YOUR cab co.BOSS to see a copy of it PLEASE..& let us know WHAT he / she say's about it..eh.? The Dispatch Newsletter is dated.." OCTOBER 2002 "..the TLPA lawyers that wrote it were Arthur Herold and Charles M.Watkins, of Webster Chamberlain and Bean, Washington, D.C.!!( GOOD LUCK ).In closing, PLEASE check out OSHA's Fact Sheet on their website ( type in the word " TAXI ' in the searchbox )& scroll down to " Risk Factors & Prevenative Measures for Taxi & Livery Drivers." Here's OSHA's website: www.osha.gov ( sorry 4 such a LONG post y'all ) BUT... " Safety On The Job / Workplace Safety " must be PRIORITY # 1..!! If u don't believe ME..just ask your wife, son, daughter, mother or ANY other loved one who REALLY GIVES A **** about YOU.!! ( AKA - a " OBJECTIVE OPINION " )..well..kinda objective.!MUCH MORE LATER I PRAY..!!.. Most Sincerely & RESPECTFULLY Submitted F.Y.Info.Jim Sz.@ the I.T.D.S.C.( who will be MORE THAN HAPPY to mail / fax a copy of the TLPA's Dispatch Newsletter from Oct.2002 Titled:" NEGLINGENCE IN CAB COMPANY OPERATIONS ".!)P.S. = Please be sure to make a X-tra copy of it when your BOSS gives U a copy to give to one of your TRUSTED loved ones to give to a Lawyer in case U get: SHOT, KNIFED, RAPED, MUGGED or MURDERED.!!
Both? Who's going to pay for that?
Dagobert is right, drivers have their shield open, but at least the back of my head is shield to keep the passenger in the back seat from wrapping his arm around my neck while the second passenger digs in my pocket.
I agree with Mr. Budzynski.
Even if the shield isn't closed (and over 90% of the time it isn't, in my estimation) it does protect the cabdriver from two- or one-man strong-arm robberies as he describes.
Cameras do add another source of safety for us; this isn't a one or the other argument. Both are valuable and can be used separately or together.
TED BUDZYNSKI FOR CHICAGO CABDRIVERS!
-Mike Foulks
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Dagobert is right, drivers have their shield open, but at least the back of my head is shield to keep the passenger in the back seat from wrapping his arm around my neck while the second passenger digs in my pocket.
I don't know if either are safe. The shield is not bullet proof. The attacker can kill the cab driver with the camera and then break the camera. I doubt either is safe
How long does it to sell a medallion? I might want to sell mine with car for 150,000.
Hello, You need to learn more about both of these items. The camera transmits the photos as soon as the guy enteres the cab. Breaking the camera won;t help him if it is actually working. We don't know the percent of time the camera is actually working right now. Anything transmitted via wireless signals can fail. Do you think the sykscrapers help?
The partition probably can't be penetrated 99% of the time if the guy is inside the cab woth the gun right against the partition. If the guy pulls the gun back and has some high power who knows? Time for mythbusters to investigate!
Who needs Mythbusters?
They are about ratings not about truth.
A perp with a gun (which is the only logical weapon for assailants targeting cab drivers WITH partitions) willnever 'test' the bullet-resistance capacity of the partition.
Taxi partitions have an unbroken record/history of having, always... 'directing' assailants to use another window to pose a threat.
If a partition installed in a taxi forces an assailant to NOT shoot at the partition.... but instead prompts him to shoot through another window... where is the benefit?
SWC
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
Hello, You need to learn more about both of these items. The camera transmits the photos as soon as the guy enteres the cab. Breaking the camera won;t help him if it is actually working. We don't know the percent of time the camera is actually working right now. Anything transmitted via wireless signals can fail. Do you think the sykscrapers help?
The partition probably can't be penetrated 99% of the time if the guy is inside the cab woth the gun right against the partition. If the guy pulls the gun back and has some high power who knows? Time for mythbusters to investigate!
Wow. A good answer as well. What do we owe the appearance of the "nice" Mike to?
Ted, Thisis the most common of all cab driver robberies. I have not heard of it happening ever to one that has a shield. You are a wise man and this is why I nominated you for CCO president awhile ago. I still wish you would reconsider. I saw W. Weiss at the field a few weeks ago and he told me he would like to run for a vice president position with the CCO if you would run for President. Please reconsider Ted.
Crooks are smart. They can figure a way out. When, the robber kills the cab driver. He will brake and probably steal the camera. As for the shield all cabbies leave them open all the time.
The camera sends the image to a base as soon as the person enters the taxi. The quality of the image is to be determined. Ask R. Kelly about image quality and the effect it has on convictions. A guy can't drop the noose even if the shield is open. As Ted pointed out this was the most common robbery tactic. I don't close the shield when I pick up an 80 year old Jewish woman. I do close it before I let certain people in though. This is my right. I encourage other to think before they unlock the door.
I encourage YOU to consider what 'message' it sends to a passenger/assailant... when the driver closes the weapon access hole.
--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---
Replying to:
The camera sends the image to a base as soon as the person enters the taxi. The quality of the image is to be determined. Ask R. Kelly about image quality and the effect it has on convictions. A guy can't drop the noose even if the shield is open. As Ted pointed out this was the most common robbery tactic. I don't close the shield when I pick up an 80 year old Jewish woman. I do close it before I let certain people in though. This is my right. I encourage other to think before they unlock the door.
