A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shot at



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old September 9th 14, 05:29 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shot at


"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2014 20:19, TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2014 15:57, TMS320 wrote:

"JNugent" wrote:
TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message

"Alamo Heights Police say the bicyclist apparently became upset that
a
white 4-door vehicle was parked in a bicycle lane and broke the
vehicle's windshield".

Just like that, eh?

Well, it might be useful to know whether he actually broke the
'windshield'

The report says he did.

The report says that the witnesses thought he did.


The police were your "witnesses". They are unlikely to have been doing
anything except quoting what he told them.


Read it again. "A person who witnessed the act..."


...is not the person quoted in the report.

http://news4sanantonio.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/bicyclist-chased-shot-at-after-breaking-car-windshield-15172.shtml

The report says (verbatim):

"The chase started around 7 p.m. Friday on Rittiman Road. Alamo Heights
Police say the bicyclist apparently became upset that a white 4-door
vehicle was parked in a bicycle lane and broke the vehicle's windshield."

Note the statement by the police. They must have had that from the cyclist
who vandalised the car.


There are no clues. Believe what you will that but I will continue on the
basis that the witness was a bystander.

Nothing about witnesses to the criminal damage as the source of the story.
The police must have been given that part of the story by the criminal who
caused the damage to the car.

Since he will be the complainant in the matter being dealt with by the
police, he ought to know.


I see you are unable to suggest how it could be broken.


In matters of criminal damage, I readily defer to those practiced in it.
You seem to know a lot about it.


I only know thar windscreens are extremely robust.


More so today than in the past. I can remember that cars as late as the
1980s had windscreens which would shatter into an almost-opaque network of
thousands of tuiny pieces if struck hard enough. Today, they merely chip
in the same circumstances, and the chip is often repairable.


What kind of antique were you driving in the 1980's? Laminated was common
(certainly on cars made in foreign lands) from the late 60's (if not
earlier).

But that relative invulnerability relates to damage caused accidentally,
typically by stones flung up by the tyres of another vehicle.


With very high relative velocity.

A blunt instrument will definitely cause damage to a windscreen.


With very low relative velocity. You clearly have no concept of kinetic
energy.

Unless a credible
suggestion is put forward then a report of damage caused also cannot be
credible. Damage found could have been pre-existing.


How can damage to a windscreen happen simply by parking the vehicle
against a kerb (or "curb", seeing that it was the USA)?


Eh? Where did that come from? Pre-existing could be 10 minutes or 3 years. A
witness would have no clue of origin.

Whether you want to believe the report or not (and it appears that you
cannot bring yourself to it), the glass didn't break without assistance.


It is very straightforward. When a story says that a person (ie, bicycle
rider) broke something that is inherently very strong, there is a
significant
credibility gap. Just like that story a few weeks ago about a broken mirror.
Or perhaps cyclists really are supermen.



Ads
  #32  
Old September 9th 14, 05:50 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shotat

On 09/09/2014 17:29, TMS320 wrote:

"JNugent" wrote:
TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote:
TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote:
TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message


"Alamo Heights Police say the bicyclist apparently became upset that
a white 4-door vehicle was parked in a bicycle lane and broke the
vehicle's windshield".


Just like that, eh?


Well, it might be useful to know whether he actually broke the
'windshield'


The report says he did.


The report says that the witnesses thought he did.


The police were your "witnesses". They are unlikely to have been doing
anything except quoting what he told them.


Read it again. "A person who witnessed the act..."


...is not the person quoted in the report.


http://news4sanantonio.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/bicyclist-chased-shot-at-after-breaking-car-windshield-15172.shtml


The report says (verbatim):

"The chase started around 7 p.m. Friday on Rittiman Road. Alamo Heights
Police say the bicyclist apparently became upset that a white 4-door
vehicle was parked in a bicycle lane and broke the vehicle's windshield."


Note the statement by the police. They must have had that from the cyclist
who vandalised the car.


There are no clues. Believe what you will that but I will continue on the
basis that the witness was a bystander.


Is anyone surprised that you are only prepared to continue on a basis
for which there is no evidence?

You cannot accept that a cyclist has done something wrong. So no change
there.

Nothing about witnesses to the criminal damage as the source of the story.
The police must have been given that part of the story by the criminal who
caused the damage to the car.


Since he will be the complainant in the matter being dealt with by the
police, he ought to know.


I see you are unable to suggest how it could be broken.


In matters of criminal damage, I readily defer to those practiced in it.
You seem to know a lot about it.


I only know thar windscreens are extremely robust.


More so today than in the past. I can remember that cars as late as the
1980s had windscreens which would shatter into an almost-opaque network of
thousands of tuiny pieces if struck hard enough. Today, they merely chip
in the same circumstances, and the chip is often repairable.


What kind of antique were you driving in the 1980's? Laminated was common
(certainly on cars made in foreign lands) from the late 60's (if not
earlier).


It really doesn't matter what sort of car(s) I had in the 1980s. Maybe
some of them had one sort of windcsreen and others had another sort.
Certainly, I remember one of them (in an A-prefix car) shattering when
hit by a small stone flung up by a vehicle wheel.

But it has nothing to do with the crime committed by the Texan cyclist -
does it?

But that relative invulnerability relates to damage caused accidentally,
typically by stones flung up by the tyres of another vehicle.


With very high relative velocity.


True.

And?

Are you *really* trying to say that a windscreen cannot be broken by a
human wielding a weapon or implement?

A blunt instrument will definitely cause damage to a windscreen.


With very low relative velocity. You clearly have no concept of kinetic
energy.


You are an idiot if you think you are contributing anything useful.
Unless the report is all lies (ie, unless the police are lying about
what was reported to them by the cyclist - who managed to make himself a
victim rather then the perp), the cyclist broke the windscreen. It's
what gave rise to what happened later.

Unless a credible
suggestion is put forward then a report of damage caused also cannot be
credible. Damage found could have been pre-existing.


How can damage to a windscreen happen simply by parking the vehicle
against a kerb (or "curb", seeing that it was the USA)?


Eh? Where did that come from? Pre-existing could be 10 minutes or 3 years. A
witness would have no clue of origin.


Except by seeing the crime in commission (which is what is reported),
you mean?

And what about the cyclist?

By the time he's changed his underwear, he's a witness to other things
as well and co-operating with the police. Would the police quote
evidence (of criminal damage) against the cyclist whilst he is giving
them a denial of it?

Whether you want to believe the report or not (and it appears that you
cannot bring yourself to it), the glass didn't break without assistance.


It is very straightforward. When a story says that a person (ie, bicycle
rider) broke something that is inherently very strong, there is a
significant credibility gap.


Windscreens are not unbreakable, so your theory holds no water.

Here's a video of a woman doing that which you say is impossible:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93HaJU-Noeo

Over to you.
  #33  
Old September 9th 14, 06:30 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 34
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shot at

"TMS320" wrote in message
...

"JNugent" wrote in message
More so today than in the past. I can remember that cars as late as the
1980s had windscreens which would shatter into an almost-opaque network
of
thousands of tiny pieces if struck hard enough. Today, they merely chip
in the same circumstances, and the chip is often repairable.


What kind of antique were you driving in the 1980's? Laminated was common
(certainly on cars made in foreign lands) from the late 60's (if not
earlier).


Toughened, as opposed to laminated, windscreens were common into the 1980s
in the UK. My dad's 1970s Hillman Hunters had them; my 1980 and 1985 Renault
5s had them. I can't remember whether my 1988 VW Golf did. My 1993 Golf
certainly didn't, although the sunroof did - I remember going out to my car,
on the flightpath from Heathrow, one morning and finding a football size
hole in the sunroof, a strange chemical smell, and loads of glass pea-gravel
and a damp patch on the seat: I think a ball of iced chemical toilet liquid
had dropped from an aircraft :-(

Toughened glass is easy to detect if you wear polarising sunglasses because
you see a spotty coloured pattern (like leopard skin) over most of the
windscreen. It breaks into small pebbles of glass, whereas laminated glass
sometimes just chips or cracks, and if an object penetrates it, you get a
large depression with glass sticking to the plastic lamination.

  #34  
Old September 9th 14, 07:35 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,757
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shotat

On 09/09/2014 17:29, TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2014 20:19, TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 08/09/2014 15:57, TMS320 wrote:

"JNugent" wrote:
TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote in message

"Alamo Heights Police say the bicyclist apparently became upset that
a
white 4-door vehicle was parked in a bicycle lane and broke the
vehicle's windshield".

Just like that, eh?

Well, it might be useful to know whether he actually broke the
'windshield'

The report says he did.

The report says that the witnesses thought he did.

The police were your "witnesses". They are unlikely to have been doing
anything except quoting what he told them.

Read it again. "A person who witnessed the act..."


...is not the person quoted in the report.

http://news4sanantonio.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/bicyclist-chased-shot-at-after-breaking-car-windshield-15172.shtml

The report says (verbatim):

"The chase started around 7 p.m. Friday on Rittiman Road. Alamo Heights
Police say the bicyclist apparently became upset that a white 4-door
vehicle was parked in a bicycle lane and broke the vehicle's windshield."

Note the statement by the police. They must have had that from the cyclist
who vandalised the car.


There are no clues. Believe what you will that but I will continue on the
basis that the witness was a bystander.

Nothing about witnesses to the criminal damage as the source of the story.
The police must have been given that part of the story by the criminal who
caused the damage to the car.

Since he will be the complainant in the matter being dealt with by the
police, he ought to know.

I see you are unable to suggest how it could be broken.

In matters of criminal damage, I readily defer to those practiced in it.
You seem to know a lot about it.

I only know thar windscreens are extremely robust.


More so today than in the past. I can remember that cars as late as the
1980s had windscreens which would shatter into an almost-opaque network of
thousands of tuiny pieces if struck hard enough. Today, they merely chip
in the same circumstances, and the chip is often repairable.


What kind of antique were you driving in the 1980's? Laminated was common
(certainly on cars made in foreign lands) from the late 60's (if not
earlier).

But that relative invulnerability relates to damage caused accidentally,
typically by stones flung up by the tyres of another vehicle.


With very high relative velocity.

A blunt instrument will definitely cause damage to a windscreen.


With very low relative velocity. You clearly have no concept of kinetic
energy.

Unless a credible
suggestion is put forward then a report of damage caused also cannot be
credible. Damage found could have been pre-existing.


How can damage to a windscreen happen simply by parking the vehicle
against a kerb (or "curb", seeing that it was the USA)?


Eh? Where did that come from? Pre-existing could be 10 minutes or 3 years. A
witness would have no clue of origin.

Whether you want to believe the report or not (and it appears that you
cannot bring yourself to it), the glass didn't break without assistance.


It is very straightforward. When a story says that a person (ie, bicycle
rider) broke something that is inherently very strong, there is a
significant
credibility gap. Just like that story a few weeks ago about a broken mirror.
Or perhaps cyclists really are supermen.



I broke a laminated screen by pressing a stick on mirror too hard.
  #35  
Old September 9th 14, 11:53 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shot at

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

I broke a laminated screen by pressing a stick on mirror too hard.


OK. How much did it break?


  #36  
Old September 9th 14, 11:57 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shot at


"JNugent" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2014 17:29, TMS320 wrote:

What kind of antique were you driving in the 1980's? Laminated was common
(certainly on cars made in foreign lands) from the late 60's (if not
earlier).


It really doesn't matter what sort of car(s) I had in the 1980s. Maybe
some of them had one sort of windcsreen and others had another sort.
Certainly, I remember one of them (in an A-prefix car) shattering when hit
by a small stone flung up by a vehicle wheel.


As late as A-prefix? No wonder the British motor industry went belly up.

But it has nothing to do with the crime committed by the Texan cyclist -
does it?

But that relative invulnerability relates to damage caused accidentally,
typically by stones flung up by the tyres of another vehicle.


With very high relative velocity.


True.

And?


As below. "You clearly have no concept of kinetic energy."

Are you *really* trying to say that a windscreen cannot be broken by a
human wielding a weapon or implement?


As ever, you run off imagining that one thing said implies another thing.

A blunt instrument will definitely cause damage to a windscreen.


With very low relative velocity. You clearly have no concept of kinetic
energy.


You are an idiot if you think you are contributing anything useful. Unless
the report is all lies (ie, unless the police are lying about what was
reported to them by the cyclist - who managed to make himself a victim
rather then the perp), the cyclist broke the windscreen. It's what gave
rise to what happened later.


Whatever you try to believe the report still does not tell us how the police
got their information. And obviously, journalists always provide accurate
reports.

Windscreens are not unbreakable, so your theory holds no water.


Just like everything else in this universe, they have a limit. The matter in
hand is about how a person carrying routine cycle accessories is able to
exceed this particular limit.

Here's a video of a woman doing that which you say is impossible:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=93HaJU-Noeo

Over to you.


If you think he went out tooled up why didn't you say so earlier?


  #37  
Old September 10th 14, 08:15 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,757
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shotat

On 09/09/2014 23:53, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

I broke a laminated screen by pressing a stick on mirror too hard.


OK. How much did it break?



A crack that went downwards.
  #38  
Old September 10th 14, 09:10 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
NY
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 34
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shot at

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2014 23:53, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

I broke a laminated screen by pressing a stick on mirror too hard.


OK. How much did it break?



A crack that went downwards.


You were unlucky.

I remember our cross-country run at school went past a car breakers yard
and, being young lads, we'd sometimes thrown stones at the car windscreens.
One day there was a scrap car parked outside the gates, right next to us,
and there was a big boulder nearby... We were rather disappointed that a
boulder weighing several pounds, when lobbed at the windscreen, just bounced
off.

  #39  
Old September 10th 14, 08:24 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shot at


"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2014 23:53, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

I broke a laminated screen by pressing a stick on mirror too hard.


OK. How much did it break?

A crack that went downwards.


I once had a very deep stonechip (in a laminated windscreen on a 1975
car, incidentally) and gently pressing it caused a crack to spread. That is
the nature of cracks. But it required a lot of energy from a sharp edged
object to originate it.


  #40  
Old September 10th 14, 09:01 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,757
Default OT USA. Cyclist breaks empty, parked, car window and gets shotat

On 10/09/2014 20:24, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...
On 09/09/2014 23:53, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote in message

I broke a laminated screen by pressing a stick on mirror too hard.

OK. How much did it break?

A crack that went downwards.


I once had a very deep stonechip (in a laminated windscreen on a 1975
car, incidentally) and gently pressing it caused a crack to spread. That is
the nature of cracks. But it required a lot of energy from a sharp edged
object to originate it.



There may have been pre-existing damage, I could not tell, I just
pressed hard on the mirror/pad and the screen split, happily the mot man
agreed to ignore it and the car was scrapped before the next mot.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Parked van kills cyclist Mrcheerful UK 4 June 10th 14 09:03 AM
Its happened again: cyclist rides straight into a parked lorry Mrcheerful UK 2 January 24th 14 10:02 AM
Cyclist kills himself by running into parked car Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 5 June 4th 13 04:51 PM
Cyclist slams into parked car Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 6 May 4th 13 12:30 AM
Cyclist hits and runs a parked car Mrcheerful[_3_] UK 41 June 5th 12 01:17 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:25 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.