indyfabz

I have seen several stories about people who have been nabbed in hit and run cases thanks to cyclists having video so I can see a camera being an asset in that respect. Otherwise, forget it.

OldsCOOL

Nor I.

dalava

I kind of "get it" for some people to use it for 'after the fact" proof in legal disputes. What I don't get is people taking themselves out of an enjoyable experience, and worrying about "recording themselves of that experience", and afterwards, insisting on sharing that "recorded experience" with the world.

motorthings

in case your response was not totally sarcastic...
a fetish for revenge IS unattractive, but getting a new bike for a destroyed one seems fair enough.
also, my gopro doesn't make me contemplate getting hit by a car, it just lessens the possible financial burden, so i am free to contemplate anything else i want, like the GoPoo camera.

rpenmanparker 

How did that help either the person with the camera or the person who was hit? Are we all required to be photo-witnesses for all the bad things that happen in our daily lives now?

indyfabz

I can see someone saddled with medical bills and bike replacement costs not wanting to "[j]ust let it go."

For the same reason, car cams in Russia are relatively common because of the drunk driving problems. Innocent victims want to be able to prove that they are not at fault when they get t-boned going through an intersection with the light. They are also great at capturing cool footage of meteors.

LesterOfPuppets

If I had a chance to ride the Alpe d'Huez, I'd be tempted to Go-Pro it.

rpenmanparker 

I was being very serious!

Think about what your are saying. Every time you ride you are preparing to litigate for a damaged bike due to a crash. We don't do that for cars that cost much more. It's sick. My advice is only ride bikes you can afford to replace. Simpler all around.

rjones28 

Yes.

rpenmanparker 

Just because nobody would believe you otherwise!

indyfabz

Huh? The person with the camera and the person who got hit are the same. They have helped police identify hit and run drivers who can then be held legally responsible for their crimes and the economic damages resulting from their actions.

rpenmanparker 

Count me out.

rpenmanparker 

I can't tell you how good that makes me feel. All is right with the world.

LesterOfPuppets

Hahaha. Once they view 6 hours of me wheezing and complaining as I hike up the hill pushing my bike, they'll believe it!

indyfabz

And by no means ride a bike unless you can afford to pay all uncovered medical expenses in the event of an accident.

Kaminokaze

Been there Done That!

rpenmanparker 

I think they will give it up and tell you they believe it after about 10 minutes.

rjones28 

GoPro shows are the new vacation slide show.

rpenmanparker 

Duh! And I thought we didn't agree!

Agent Cooper

This is actually what I was getting at in my previous post. I don't think it's necessarily a revenge fetish that motivates these folks, more the justice angle.

I feel that the more people there are out riding who are carrying cameras, the less all cyclists have to worry about getting hit in the first place. Honest accidents will still happen, yes, but the occasional rude, impatient or aggressive driver who has some myopic hatred of cylists and decides to run one off the road on purpose will think twice about doing so if he knows said cyclist probably has a video of the whole event with a mugshot and license plate ready to hand to a judge. The days of forcing a cyclist off the road into a ditch on a country road and driving away scot-free are quickly coming to an end. Yes, these are very rare events in the grand scheme but they do happen.

Like I said, I don't carry a camera either. But I don't have to in order to benefit from the trend. As the practice becomes more common, just knowing that there's increasing likelihood that a cyclist (not to mention other drivers and pedestrian passersby) has a camera on board is going to prevent alot of intentional stupidity.

rjones28 

I wasn't thinking about car crashes when I bought my bike.

rpenmanparker 

Well, you make a very good point. I don't know what you know about "game theory", but it treats this question pretty well. Many (many, many) years ago there was a great article about it in, drum roll please, Playboy. (Yes, I did used to read the articles!...Too!) Anyway, the article discussed such questions as do you need to stop for a stranded driver, and how the need to do so could be estimated using game theory (basically probability). In other words what were the chances that someone else would come by and stop fairly soon. Your comment about not carrying a camera but benefiting from the trend is really the same kind of situation. Interesting.

rpenmanparker 

That's what I like to hear!

Edonis13

so you don't think people should be held accountable for their actions and crimes that can be life altering or life ending for an innocent person? lol, ok.

TassR700

One other reason in favor of the camera is the number of people who are hit or crash and have no memory of what happened. It would be nice for the individual or family to know what happened. I have a friend who crashed solo and to this day does not know how it happened. He ended up with a broken femur and concussion but no witnesses. Empty rail trail, no road irregularities etc. Still bugs him after a couple years.