Why would a passenger train driver need to see internal CCTV images?

[Lewisham2221]

It hasn't been on public transport for over 30 years at all. You have just made that up. As for being on CCTV regardless, yes I know, but CCTV and the release of images taken by CCTV is regulated. There was quite a furore when Branson released images clearly showing people's faces when rebutting Corbyn's claim he had to stand on a VTEC service. Therefore, showing CCTV images to everybody on a train is either against the regulations or certainly against the spirit of the regulations and should be clamped down on.

Displaying CCTV images of a location, to other people who are in that same location, has been a thing since I was a child.

That is distinctly different to publicly releasing CCTV images after the time to everyone, regardless of whether they were in that location at the time or not.

 

[Mattplans]

So you dislike surveillance that specifically targets criminals but think broadcasting images of people doing absolutely nothing wrong is fine? Well, I don't.

I dislike surveillance where it's not clear it's taking place. This practice by ToCs is deceptive by nature. But sure, it's within the confines of the law, helps them recover revenue and helps them "target criminals". These images are not being broadcasted in the way you suggest, just confined to a carriage? This deters anti-social behaviour.
And although, as you say, I "dislike surveillance", I accept it's happening. Removing CCTV repeaters doesn't reduce the amount of surveillance. At least let it serve a purpose by discouraging actual criminal behaviour.

 

[RailAleFan]

.

 

[The exile]

Except it isn't a deterrent in any way. The vast majority of passengers behave in a civilised manner anyway and those that don't really aren't going to either care or be deterred. It is just a creeping surveillance society that should be strictly regulated and in most cases stopped.

It is the nature of any deterrent that there is a group of people who will never be deterred; a group of people who don’t need to be deterred because they would never dream of doing whatever it is and a group in the middle who might - the size of which depends on the offence and the deterrent. More people are in this last group than would be prepared to admit it.

 

[Hadders]

Displaying CCTV images serves two purposes:

- Deter potential criminals
- Reassures passengers

Granted, it won't deter or reassure everyone but it does deter or reassure many. We live in dangerous times and many people find travelling by train anxious, especially vulnerable and less confident passengers.

 

[stuu]

Displaying CCTV images serves two purposes:

- Deter potential criminals
- Reassures passengers

Granted, it won't deter or reassure everyone but it does deter or reassure many. We live in dangerous times and many people find travelling by train anxious, especially vulnerable and less confident passengers.

Statiatically we don't live in dangerous times, but the perception is that things are far worse than they are. Social media and people pushing certain agendas are to blame

 

[contrex]

'Several' handles... I blame the BBC for this modern bizarre trend of substituting 'multiple'; for 'many', 'several', etc.

I agree that using 'many' or 'several' can be useful to give better detail in context, e.g. five compaints about a product might be several, and five hundred could be many, but if you don't know how many is a few, and how many is a lot, 'multiple' is a reasonable way of saying 'more than one'.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Statiatically we don't live in dangerous times, but the perception is that things are far worse than they are. Social media and people pushing certain agendas are to blame

I agree totally. The claim that we live in dangerous times and so not only should we all be observed at all times but those images should be broadcast to all and sundry is the sort of hysterical nonsense peddled to justify erosion of our privacy and liberty. There is such a thing as proportionality. Having monitored CCTV in all of our homes would no doubt reduce domestic violence but most rational people would claim it is disproportionate.

And if we do live in such dangerous times that passengers need to be aware of the behaviour of other passengers at the other end of the train then the trend of having open ended carriages where anybody can easily walk through and you can't barricade yourself in away from the danger is a bit of a mistake.