Log in with a social network:
Log in with your username or email:
Whoa whoa... someone presents a valid argument in counter to what you are saying and your argument back is essentially... "It`s all fake."?
I can understand when people call conspiracy with big matters, but why is it so unbelievable to you that this happened?
"And there are countless "real life cop" crap TV shows on here which show real CCTV operators catching drunks fighting etc, from all across the UK. The CCTV footage is always full colour, always full motion, and more often than not the cameras are remotely operable."
This circles around to my original point - do you always believe everything you`re force-fed by the media or see on the internet? Interesting ...
And there are countless "real life cop" crap TV shows on here which show real CCTV operators catching drunks fighting etc, from all across the UK. The CCTV footage is always full colour, always full motion, and more often than not the cameras are remotely operable.
Perhaps the cameras you saw were sub-standard, but if no-name backwater town councils have the level of equipment that regularly features on these shows, it`s pretty safe to assume big cities will have equal if not better facilities.
Well it got you to take the trouble to register just to make that comment. Obviously has some effect.
My "admittedly non-expert" opinion meaning I am neither a security expert, rapid transit authority, nor a photographer/cinematographer. That is not to say that I have not seen my share of the equipment involved.
My second post took more umbrage with the tone of his response than anything. The implied assumption that because I live in the U.S. I couldn`t possibly know what goes on in the rest of the world was the focus of my second response. So, on that basis, I still challenge the validity of it.
Not to get into a pissing contest, here, but I also challenge the validity of your own assertion. I`ve been to your country and seen some of your security cam equipment and footage. Not only is what I have seen not universally up to par with your statement, but some of said equipment simply didn`t work when I was there - and this was in London.
Please explain how this squares away with your earlier statement:
[quote]The film is too perfect and too steady to be real footage, in my (admittedly non-expert) opinion.[/quote]
Also, davymid`s point was perfectly valid. US governments may put low-quality cameras in public areas to save money, but (for example) here in the UK we have 1% of the world`s population but 20% of its CCTV cameras. All of them are full colour and high framerate. An increasing number are remotely controlled to allow panning and zooming by an operator.
Don`t assume you know me. Although you seem to be correct about the footage, I lived half my life in Europe. I am an accredited Industrial Electrician in 27 countries (The European Union) and have been to and worked in several of them. I`ve seen more of the kind of equipment that companies and governments use in this sort of situation than you realize.
Your condescending tone towards the U.S. in general and my comment specifically was unwarranted. Not everyone you address here is a brain dead redneck who`s never been off the farm. Nor is everything about Europe so much better.
If this footage is real and the article you linked to is genuine then this truly is a horrific occurrence. But, sadly, not that uncommon. The article states that several folks were ejected from their cars. I saw none. That doesn`t mean it didn`t happen. But seeing that crash from three separate views, it still makes me wonder.
"That is a terrifying bit of footage.I can`t see people surviving the first car that flipped." - You don`t know a great deal about car safety then, I`d wager. They`d be hurt, but far from killed.
‘The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people’s money’ - Margaret Thatcher
That`s because you live in America, Land of the Free, as long as you can afford it. Government service in other countries around the world have this kind of technology as standard on public transit, and sadly this wasn`t a movie stunt.
Governments run on the lowest bidder system which means the cameras they put on streets, rapid transit systems, in subways, etc. tend to be cheap, low definition and low frame rate cams and recording systems to keep costs down. And, just for argument`s sake, who ever heard of putting 3 separate cameras on a bus?
This looks like a stunt done for a movie, television show or commercial to me. The film is too perfect and too steady to be real footage, in my (admittedly non-expert) opinion.
The Engrish might have failed, but the message (I think) was true: these things seem just like a bit of news and somewhat trivial to us, but when you think about the impact on just one person, it`s huge. And there were way more than that injured, killed, or who had their cars totaled and are going to suffer for it.
the engrish at the end was so fail...
That is EXACTLY my point.
Chances are one of the cars the bus hit caused the horn to keep going even if no one was hitting it on the steering wheel. It happens in bad car crashes.
That first car was plowed.
Because this is a website that delivers links to things that are supposed to make you not bored anymore.
I assume this is a poor translation of something along the lines of... "You only need to drop your guard for a second to cause pain that lasts a lifetime."
and 4 people died...
Why the hell would you be laughing at this? Get back to work moron.
According to the videos comments, this is some info about what happened