Originally Posted by
Leisesturm
There is a subtle difference between a driver running a dashcam to (try and) prove that they didn't do anything wrong in a collision, and that of a cyclist running a helmet cam to try and prove that a driver did do something wrong. Cyclists completely miss the irony in strapping on a camera when 50% of accidents are the cyclists fault. I don't know a cyclist who believes that cyclists CAN do any wrong. Its the texting, distracted, moron driver who WILL run them down and they are going to get evidence of that. Maybe. Most videos I see just show a clueless cyclist barreling into a situation I would easily have avoided. I have yet to see a license plate I could discern or anything remotely useful in ANY of the videos I have seen. I'll say it again, an objective, corroborated, 3rd party verbal and/or video account(s) of a collision is the minimum any sane defense attorney would allow to be used in any serious litigation. I would fire any attorney who allowed some cyclists fuzzy tumblings on a $120.00 go pro knock-off to raise my insurance premiums 30%. Ride smarter, it will be the best money never spent.
Why the twisting of words? Why is it a driver is proving that he did nothing wrong but the cyclist is proving the driver did something wrong? Why cant the cyclist be proving he did nothing wrong as well?
I guess you have never seen any video that proved anything? I mean that video above where the cop drives head into a stationary cyclist while on his phone didnt show a damn thing I guess. Chances are if that guy didnt have the video the cop is never going to give himself up and say he was on his phone. Who do you think they were going to believe? A cop or random cyclist? The cop got caught red handed and hopefully whoever took that video got everything he could out of that. A new bike, some time off, the cop suspended, and some extra cash for his troubles of getting hit. Its funny you say ride smarter like thats going to prevent every situation... thats just not feasible. In that video above theres nothing he could have done more to protect himself. He stopped looked left and right multiple times and even waited EXTRA long to make a turn and still got rocked by a cop. Tell me how you would have avoided that situation? You better not say something like "I wouldnt be on that street" because no matter where you ride theres going to be a stop sign somewhere.
As for the quality of a cheap $120 GoPro. As long as you can discern whats happening in the video thats more than enough. Plenty of people have been put away from fuzzy 2fps CCTV video where you can barely make out anything. A $120 GoPro will be more than good enough to have clear evidence to show what has happened in a situation.
The only real legit complaint for a cyclist not having a camera(if it can be considered legit) is that it looks insanely stupid. A camera mounted on a helmet just looks downright goofy. Its pretty much accepted in mountain biking but some some reason its just bad look for a road cyclist. I agree a helmet mounted camera looks aesthetically bad.
Three years ago I was hit by a car who was making a left hand turn and in trying to beat some traffic hit me while turning. Luckily it was at a super busy intersection and there were at least 5-6 peds and a bunch of other people who saw the incident to confirm that I was not at fault. But if it was my word vs the other guys word Im not so sure I would have been able to get insurance to pay for all the expenses because of it. These days most people just assume its the cyclists fault. It would have been nice to have a camera to show the situation just in case no one was there to corroborate my side of the story.
I recently picked up a camera to mount on my helmet but it wasnt for the purpose of capturing other people, but more to show off some of the nice places to ride. Since I do have the camera it now doubles as some protection as well. I dont even use it on every ride though.
I just dont understand the negative attitude for people who ride around with cameras in this thread. If you have the ability to protect yourself whats the problem?
Originally Posted by
Maelochs
This is a point. I don't figure a lot of drivers are going to back into me, and I don't figure I am going to let them hit me if I can see them coming. And most states don't demand front license plates, so even a rear-facing camera might not solidly identify the offending driver. I figure most of the time riders get hit from the sides or back by a car traveling faster than the rider and if it is any kind of significant hit the bike goes who knows where ... so the odds of getting a clear rear license plate capture are a little long.
Not in any way to discourage those who feel better using cameras .... or helmets, or kneepads, or religious icons, or whatever. if what you bring helps you enjoy your ride, go for it.
Sometimes a license plate isnt needed. Only something to corroborate the story of what happened. Other people on hand might have seen the license plate.
Also, the type of camera being used matters as well. I have been using a 360 camera and everything all around me is captured. No matter which direction I am hit from there is going to be some evidence of your license plate, car, or whatever.