• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Dash/Windshield Mounted Video Cameras and State Laws

USNA69

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 13, 2010
Messages
375
Location
Norfolk, Virginia, USA
Fellow OCers,

The subject of dashcams came up in another thread, but I wanted to begin a new one in order to give the issue visibility.

Most of us already know the value of carrying a digital voice recorder (DVR). The dashcam is a logical extension of the ability to record an event for our legal protection. And, like DVRs and firearms, laws vary from state to state. We are a Virginia forum, but we also travel into nearby states and must be wary of the laws of those states.

I had planned a trip to MD to visit a cousin and told him that I had purchased a dashcam. He warned me to be carful how I use it in MD.

He cited two links to illustrate his warning:

http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/29/maryland-cops-say-its-illegal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNcDGqzAB30

Just as we do regarding our guns, we must do our homework, if we to venture into other states ... especially the Peoples Republic of Marylandistan.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
You are one step ahead of me. Where do I go to buy a dashcam?

I ordered this one Nemo:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0053DDNW6/ref=oh_details_o02_s00_i00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

A note on legality in other states. Public Video is legal in every state. The problem comes up with the audio in some places. Gradually, the courts are accepting that audio and video go hand in hand and dismembering the old laws but it's best to check first.

I think the Maryland law was struck down but since you couldn't get me there on a bet, I haven't kept up with the cases.
 

Glockster

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 24, 2010
Messages
786
Location
Houston
Wow, that is some video!


Fellow OCers,

The subject of dashcams came up in another thread, but I wanted to begin a new one in order to give the issue visibility.

Most of us already know the value of carrying a digital voice recorder (DVR). The dashcam is a logical extension of the ability to record an event for our legal protection. And, like DVRs and firearms, laws vary from state to state. We are a Virginia forum, but we also travel into nearby states and must be wary of the laws of those states.

I had planned a trip to MD to visit a cousin and told him that I had purchased a dashcam. He warned me to be carful how I use it in MD.

He cited two links to illustrate his warning:

http://reason.com/blog/2010/05/29/maryland-cops-say-its-illegal

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNcDGqzAB30

Just as we do regarding our guns, we must do our homework, if we to venture into other states ... especially the Peoples Republic of Marylandistan.
 

2a4all

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,846
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
Does the notion that the placement and size of the camera may interfere with the driver's vision or view of the road come into play here?

Such issues do come into play with windshield mounted GPS systems, AKA "Dangling Objects".

Code of VA 46.2-1054. Suspension of objects or alteration of vehicle so as to obstruct driver's view.

It shall be unlawful for any person to drive a motor vehicle on a highway in the Commonwealth with any object or objects, other than a rear view mirror, sun visor, or other equipment of the motor vehicle approved by the Superintendent, suspended from any part of the motor vehicle in such a manner as to obstruct the driver's clear view of the highway through the windshield, the front side windows, or the rear window, or to alter a passenger-carrying vehicle in such a manner as to obstruct the driver's view through the windshield. However, this section shall not apply (i) when the driver's clear view of the highway through the rear window is obstructed if such motor vehicle is equipped with a mirror on each side, so located as to reflect to the driver a view of the highway for at least 200 feet to the rear of such vehicle, (ii) to safety devices installed on the windshields of vehicles owned by private waste haulers or local governments and used to transport solid waste, or (iii) to bicycle racks installed on the front of any bus operated by any city, county, transit authority, or transit or transportation district.
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Does the notion that the placement and size of the camera may interfere with the driver's vision or view of the road come into play here?

Such issues do come into play with windshield mounted GPS systems, AKA "Dangling Objects".
Code of VA 46.2-1054. Suspension of objects or alteration of vehicle so as to obstruct driver's view.

It shall be unlawful for any person to drive a motor vehicle on a highway in the Commonwealth with any object or objects, other than a rear view mirror, sun visor, or other equipment of the motor vehicle approved by the Superintendent, suspended from any part of the motor vehicle in such a manner as to obstruct the driver's clear view of the highway through the windshield, the front side windows, or the rear window, or to alter a passenger-carrying vehicle in such a manner as to obstruct the driver's view through the windshield. However, this section shall not apply (i) when the driver's clear view of the highway through the rear window is obstructed if such motor vehicle is equipped with a mirror on each side, so located as to reflect to the driver a view of the highway for at least 200 feet to the rear of such vehicle, (ii) to safety devices installed on the windshields of vehicles owned by private waste haulers or local governments and used to transport solid waste, or (iii) to bicycle racks installed on the front of any bus operated by any city, county, transit authority, or transit or transportation district.

Since LE isn't exempted, just point out it's mounted the same as his.....then wait for the BS to start flowing.:lol:
 

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
"suspended from any part of the motor vehicle in such a manner as to obstruct the driver's clear view of the highway through the windshield"

When the camera is mounted up near or behind the rear-view mirror, unless you are extremely tall, and your car has a very high head clearance, the camera does not block the view of the road, but of some part of the sky.

Similarly for GPS units mounted by suction to the lower part of the windshield, unless you are extremely short, the GPS blocks a view of the hood of the car, not the highway.

TFred
 

2a4all

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 1, 2008
Messages
1,846
Location
Newport News, Virginia, USA
"suspended from any part of the motor vehicle in such a manner as to obstruct the driver's clear view of the highway through the windshield"

When the camera is mounted up near or behind the rear-view mirror, unless you are extremely tall, and your car has a very high head clearance, the camera does not block the view of the road, but of some part of the sky.

Similarly for GPS units mounted by suction to the lower part of the windshield, unless you are extremely short, the GPS blocks a view of the hood of the car, not the highway.

TFred
I mentioned this because the police in Newport News are pushing the "No Dangling Objects" policy, and aren't limiting offenses to items actually suspended from the mirror.:uhoh:

I suppose one could offer your arguments if stopped. If your camera were running, you'd have a record of the encounter.:eek:
 
Last edited:

TFred

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2008
Messages
7,750
Location
Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
I mentioned this because the police in Newport News are pushing the "No Dangling Objects" policy, and aren't limiting offenses to items actually suspended from the mirror.:uhoh:

I suppose one could offer your arguments if stopped. If your camera were running, you'd have a record of the encounter.:eek:
Well, it's also easy enough with a cell phone camera to take a picture from your eye position to show exactly what is behind the line of view of the object in question.

TFred
 

peter nap

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 16, 2007
Messages
13,551
Location
Valhalla
Not state specific, but this is a decent article on recording the police:

http://gizmodo.com/5900680/7-rules-for-recording-police

Not a bad article but Va is pretty open. In public, they're fair game audio and video. If you're recording audio over an electronic communication or in private, you need to be a party of or have the consent of 1 party to the conversation.

No obscene video's like hidden in dressing rooms, Etc and be very careful about videoing children.

And no, cops don't like it one bit. I spent fifteen minutes once, videoing a cop who was videoing me with his cell phone after I refused to show ID or stop videoing.
 

kenny

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 11, 2007
Messages
635
Location
Richmond Lynchburg, Virginia, USA
Talk to the guy who does the state inspection on your vehicle. They will tell no lower than three inches from the top or higher than three inches for the bottom of your windshield. Basically the same rule that allows for inspection decal of county/town sticker.
 

paramedic70002

Regular Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2006
Messages
1,440
Location
Franklin, VA, Virginia, USA
Yep. I had a 4 inch decal across the top of my windshield. Lost it in a state inspection. And show me a GPS/mount combo that doesn't 'obstruct' more than 3 inches if attached to the windshield. The thing with cops, if they want to be butts, they will claim anything is 'obstructing' your vision.
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Those statutes that prohibit surreptitious recording generally only prohibit recording other people's "private conversation". The following provides a witty explanation of Maryland's scheme (note in particular the cite in the opinion to a case called Hawes v. Carberry).

http://mdcourts.gov/opinions/coa/2001/125a00.pdf

So a private conversation is one in which the people talking have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Because these statutes were enacted as part of the 1968 Crime Control and Safe Streets Act, they were designed to limit the power of law enforcement to do illegal wiretaps. So the privacy scheme imported is the Fourth Amendment search and seizure logic, not the First Amendment privacy logic. Hence a "reasonable expectation of privacy" pretty much means that one controls the area and has a good reason to believe he cannot be overheard.

Talking with a cop on the street gives no one a reasonable expectation of privacy. Here's an easy test: if a cop could legitimately and secretly record his conversation with you for use against you at trial without violating the Fourth Amendment evidentiary rules, then it's just as much ok for you to record him in the same situation.

Taking pictures is ok, unless you're in a courtroom, secretly photographing people in a nude or seminude condition in which they have an expectation of privacy, or taking pictures for commercial use without authorization from the person being photographed. Not necessarily an exhaustive list, but those are the ones that spring to mind.

Here's another wrinkle I think is important. The states that prohibit recording without consent of all parties, or that think "oral conversation" is the same as "private conversation" enacted the laws in the form they did in order to protect the corrupt lawgivers against recording in situations other than those requiring wiretap warrants. So you, as a LEO, can't call the Governor of Maryland and chat with him about his illegal betting and gambling, and expect to be able to use the evidence you acquired in court. See, that would be a felony in Maryland. So the states that have that kind of statute are those with a history of political and legal corruption. They are also the states with the most rigorous "gun control" laws. My suggestion, don't go into those states, and don't do business with people who are in those states. They are the way they are because they are not civilized countries. Ultimately it doesn't matter what the laws are from state to state if you can't rely on the legal systems of those states anyway. In Maryland, it's not a matter of being a law-abiding, socially responsible citizen, it's being an important person, that counts.

We criticize Virginia's legal system a lot on this board, but I'll tell you as an objective observer, we're a helluva a lot better off than most states. You can at least have a hope of getting a fair trial here. I'd just as soon be in Iran or the People's Republic of China as in Massachussetts or Illinois, though.
 

half_life1052

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
270
Location
Austin, TX
We criticize Virginia's legal system a lot on this board, but I'll tell you as an objective observer, we're a helluva a lot better off than most states. You can at least have a hope of getting a fair trial here. I'd just as soon be in Iran or the People's Republic of China as in Massachussetts or Illinois, though.

You didn't mention NY. I lived there long enough to say it belongs at the top of your list. Just sayin . . .
 

user

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
2,516
Location
Northern Piedmont
Ok, here's my personal list of places to avoid: New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachussetts, Illinois, California, Hawaii, and to a lesser extent, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Michigan.

Question about mounting a "dash cam" with LED infrared illumination: don't you get a lot of glare in the picture from reflection off the windshield at night?
 

half_life1052

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2012
Messages
270
Location
Austin, TX
Ok, here's my personal list of places to avoid: New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Massachussetts, Illinois, California, Hawaii, and to a lesser extent, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Michigan.

Question about mounting a "dash cam" with LED infrared illumination: don't you get a lot of glare in the picture from reflection off the windshield at night?

You do indeed get glare from anything that is reflective to IR light if the IR LEDs are on. The ones on our vehicles are not equiped with IR lights for this reason. I have seen clips from the unit on amazon showing night recordings. They don't exhibit the problem so there must be a way to turn them off. The camera must be dual mode day/night because it is a color picture during the day. Come to think of it, the night shots were also color so maybe I am wrong and the IRs just weren't on because of ambient light. I will let you know after I have tested the unit I ordered. It should be here day after tomorrow.
 
Top