Advertisement

Nanny Cams Prove Popular For Parents Of Teen Drivers

Follow Richard

Once upon a time, parents had to be pretty crafty to track their teenagers' driving habits. Sure, they could look for obvious signs of recklessness like dents and scratches, but hard braking? Aggressive driving? Almost impossible to spot without tailing them from a distance. (Which, of course, our parents did. ALL THE TIME.)

Today, moms and dads have it easier. Thanks to many high-tech developments, parents can now track and/or control their kids' driving behavior from the comfort of home. Apps and services like T-Mobile's DriveSmart encourage teens to be smarter about texting and driving. Ford's ingenious MyKey technology lets parents limit a driver's speed and the volume of the stereo. Monitors like the Progressive Snapshot work like the black boxes on airplanes, keeping track of major events. And, of course, real black box devices may be required on all cars in the U.S. in another two years.

The extreme end of this monitoring trend is the onboard video recorder. DriveCam -- arguably the most popular of such devices -- stores footage in a cache that's regularly cleared, but when it senses "erratic vehicle movements, such as extreme braking, acceleration, cornering or a collision, the device provides a video clip of what occurred the 10 seconds before and after the event." The camera then wirelessly sends that clip to DriveCam servers so that it can be shared with parents, helping them coach their teens on safe driving behavior.

The American Family insurance company offers the DriveCam as part of its Teen Safe Driver Program; it pays for the cam and the cost of installation, offering an insurance discount in exchange. According to the American Family FAQ, the company doesn't receive video reports from the devices, and recorded incidents won't result in premium increases. That's comforting to parents and seems a lot friendlier than Progressive's Snapshot program, which can, in fact, force rate hikes.

Onboard video recorders are gaining in popularity -- in fact, DriveCam's sales grew by 87% in 2010. Given the increased availability of the hardware, plummeting costs, and shifting definitions of privacy (thanks in no small part to Twitter, Facebook, Foursquare, et al.), we'd expect to see the trend continue.

But while we agree that monitoring young drivers is important, we have to wonder: what about adults? Or the elderly? Will the trend affect them, too? And should it? Will we learn to stop worrying and love the nanny cam? Check the DriveCam demo clip below, and let us know your thoughts.

[Cnet]

Advertisement
 
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (7)
  1. Obviously the cam can't be switched off, what happens when the kid is pulled over in a state where recording a police officer is a felony and punishable by 15 years in jail?
    http://gizmodo.com/5741489/recording-a-police-officer-could-get-you-15-years-in-jail
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. @Tom: This is a pretty different scenario, and frankly, I'm not sure it would be an issue -- and if it were, I think most sensible judges would toss it out. (The courts and the public both seem to be in favor of allowing citizens to record police activities that happen in public: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2008566,00.html)
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. The link you posted reinforces my point. Though the sources in the article state that the police grounds for arresting people are thin the fact remains that Mr Graber has been charged and has to fight his case in court. He's spent 26 hours in jail and his house has been searched. Your article makes it clear that some police are misusing privacy laws to bully the public. This my point is that should an officer decide to pursue this route at the minimum the driver (and parents) would have to deal with court appearances, etc. On the plus side if you've ever seen Bad Lieutenant you'd probably want this installed in your daughter's car anyway.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. @Tom: True, but Graber was actively filming the police. DriveCam is passive -- and it only records the 10 seconds before an incident and the 10 seconds after. So unless you live in a neighborhood with REALLY fast police response times, this shouldn't be an issue.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  5. Great article! I looked for a long time and ended up getting this blackbox/ dashcam. It works great!
    www.gpsskytracker.com
    I would not like the 3rd party viewing cameras.
    It also provides great peace of mind in case of accidents or unjust traffic tickets.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  6. Good point Richard. I missed the 10 second recording and agree that a device which is focused on monitoring the driver and the driving is not likely to run afoul of the law. Trying to extrapolate this tech to protect yourself from mistakes/injustices by the police has perils.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  7. This is an excellent idea. We are about to institute cameras in all of our driving school cars thereby alleviating any concerns a parent might have. Also it allows an employer the ability to observe an employee's following our instruction standards.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion? Join the conversation!

Advertisement

Take Us With You!

 
Advertisement
Advertisement

Research New Cars

Go!


 
© 2014 MotorAuthority. All Rights Reserved. MotorAuthority is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.