Drago
Legendary Member
- Location
- Suburban Poshshire
Why would you want protection from a legal counterattack? If you're not planning on getting into fisticuffs there's no likelihood of that happening. Simply staying out of trouble is afar more effective tactic. Hopefully
The only actual utility a camera is likely to have is in the event someone wipes you out. It give you no actual protection of any kind.
Worried about getting hurt? Don't go to war in the first place. But people don't like that advice because there's a deep seated psychological need to assert their will on another, to prevail, to win, to be righteous, to have the last word, and apprehending a kicking along the way helps to show how right they were all along. To my mind its better to lose some pride and not get hurt, than to be righteous but in hospital.
Google Kenneth Noye. A camera wouldn't have helped his victim. Carrying up the road and ignoring him would.
The only actual utility a camera is likely to have is in the event someone wipes you out. It give you no actual protection of any kind.
Don't stop for a "chat" and you won't need to. Of all the assault-on-cyclist videos floating about I've yet to see one where the rider couldn't have avoided becoming a victim by choosing a different course of action.I am more than able to physically defend myself, I dont see why I should need to.
Worried about getting hurt? Don't go to war in the first place. But people don't like that advice because there's a deep seated psychological need to assert their will on another, to prevail, to win, to be righteous, to have the last word, and apprehending a kicking along the way helps to show how right they were all along. To my mind its better to lose some pride and not get hurt, than to be righteous but in hospital.
Google Kenneth Noye. A camera wouldn't have helped his victim. Carrying up the road and ignoring him would.
Last edited: