View Single Post
  #27  
Old October 28th 18, 11:05 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_10_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 350
Default Berk in a Merc gets attacked by bike weapon

On 28/10/2018 22:00, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, October 28, 2018 at 9:45:38 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 28/10/2018 21:40, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, October 28, 2018 at 9:33:33 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 28/10/2018 21:24, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, October 28, 2018 at 9:21:08 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:
On 28/10/2018 18:54, Simon Jester wrote:
On Saturday, October 27, 2018 at 11:49:49 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 27/10/2018 16:30, TMS320 wrote:
On 26/10/18 12:07, JNugent wrote:
On 26/10/2018 00:12, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/10/18 12:33, JNugent wrote:
On 25/10/2018 09:48, TMS320 wrote:

You are unable to deduce from my comments (and Simon's) that events
which should have been recorded by the dashcam are missing?

You seem to have rather missed the point (again).
The cyclist's "complaint"is reported to have been that he and his
bike were obstructed by a car. Unless the car had a "rear dashcam",
it is hard to see how even you could convince yourself that footage
of the "obstruction" could exist.

It's reported, huh?

Well, the crazed cyclist (which is how he is reported) is reported to
have offered the "justification" for the crime that he had been
obstructed. It's all there, at the same source.

I don't care what was reported.

Especially when it doesn't support what you'd rather believe.

OK, so let's see the conditions in front of the vehicle and any
reason why it was going slowly or stopping. It is also not unknown
(at least, it's something just about every cyclist knows) for drivers
to overtake and then cut in and stop.

You're best asking the publisher for that (if there is anything to
see, that is - what's the betting that the source of the obstruction
was a red traffic light, meaningless to the average London cyclist,
crazed or otherwise?).

So contact the Daily Mail. And do let us all know how you get on.

I merely passed a remark about the lack of material that seems
commonplace when a "professional" driver produces this stuff to have a
winge. Unlike you, and him, I have yet to make a judgement.

How many cars have dash-cams that face the direction of travel, lket
alone filming (OK - video-recording) out of the rear screen?


My car has front and rear cams.

Oh well... there's the answer. Jester thinks that 100% of vehicles not
only have a dash-cam but also have a rear-facing camera as well.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

Do you have any evidence to connect the equipment level of your car with
that of all the rest of the vehicles on the road?

If not, why did you intervene with such an ill-judged and irrelevant remark?

So you have no evidence to support your claim. Apology accepted.


No apology was either necessary or intended, so please don't accept a
non-existent one.

The only possible reason for your silly claim was that you "thought"
that the claimed existence of your cameras said something about the
number of cameras (front- or rear-facing) out there.

But of course, it doesn't say anything about it.


You said

"Jester thinks that 100% of vehicles not only have a dash-cam but also have a rear-facing camera as well."

You need to provide evidence for that claim, or apologise.


The evidence is already there.
Ads
 

Home - Home - Home - Home - Home