# Photographer under attack for photographing pothole victim



## darin3200 (Dec 27, 2005)

Basically this photographer in China waited by a pothole and got pictures of a guy riding his bike as he hit the pothole and crashed. He is being criticised for not warning the guy about the pothole, but he defends himself by saying he was raising attention about the pothole problem.

http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_1399668.html

Opinions?


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

why, the photog hasn't done anything illegal... I'm defimitely on his side, although morally speaking, he should've warned the other guy. But he didn't, and that's not criminal... furthermore the other guy's alright.
And that _does_ rise attention to potholes. Criticising the photog is just a tactic to avoid the subject.


----------



## Tooloose_Letrek (Dec 27, 2005)

Perhaps the photographer could have found another way to illustrate the danger of the pothole without knowingly allow a cyclist to risk harm to get his picture.  Even a staged photo could have illustrated the danger.

The photographer should be executed.

(Just kidding.)

This reminds me (loosely) of a movie I saw years ago called *C'est arrivé près de chez vous* (_Man Bites Dog_) and it was presented as a documentary about a man who wants to make a film about serial killers and he actually hooks up with one and accompanies him on his killing spree, even assisting him once when the killer needed one more hand to complete the task.  The connection here between the pot hole incident and this movie isn't solid but loosely hints of a link between the observer and the incident.


 Man Bites Dog.


----------



## Hertz van Rental (Dec 27, 2005)

The guy on the bicycle was using an umbrella. He should have been paying attention to the road.


----------



## darin3200 (Dec 27, 2005)

I'm sort of unsure about this one. On one hand, the guy on the bike is going to crash regardless, the only reason the photographer is there is to the take a picture of the inevitable.  On the other hand, at the point in time that he is there it changes the equation a bit. 
I think on the photogs side


----------



## Peanuts (Dec 27, 2005)

Hertz van Rental said:
			
		

> The guy on the bicycle was using an umbrella. He should have been paying attention to the road.


 
Or the lack of it.


----------



## mentos_007 (Dec 27, 2005)

pffff I think pgotographer was right.... I don't care that the guy on a bike is a muff... it is his problem... I agree with Hertz here... he should be paing attention to the road... what a fool takes a bike AND an ubrella when it is raining??


----------



## danalec99 (Dec 27, 2005)

good captures though!


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

danalec99 said:
			
		

> good captures though!


 
pheeew, I thought I was the only sadist to think that


----------



## panzershreck (Dec 27, 2005)

he didn't create the pothole

he's taking flak simply because he photographed it happening, whereas if you were a bystander or if you had a video camera setup and were not there when it happened, nobody would bring it up


----------



## darin3200 (Dec 27, 2005)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> pheeew, I thought I was the only sadist to think that


I thought the same thing


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

People like us should be locked up


----------



## Tooloose_Letrek (Dec 27, 2005)

Or how about this scenario...would it be okay for a photographer to spill water on a floor that made it super slippery, and sit there and take pics of the people who fall?  They (the victims) 'should' see that it's slippery, right?

Hmm...I wonder if I dare ask you guys what you think of a photographer taking pics on the public streets of strangers, never asking permission to do so?  :0


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

> Hmm...I wonder if I dare ask you guys what you think of a photographer taking pics on the public streets of strangers, never asking permission to do so? :0


that's what i do... just befor running away. Actually, if you ask'em, they won't look natural anymore. I think that kind of photography is all about the sponeity (is that the word?) of the capture.


----------



## darin3200 (Dec 27, 2005)

Tooloose_Letrek said:
			
		

> Or how about this scenario...would it be okay for a photographer to spill water on a floor that made it super slippery, and sit there and take pics of the people who fall?  They (the victims) 'should' see that it's slippery, right?
> 
> Hmm...I wonder if I dare ask you guys what you think of a photographer taking pics on the public streets of strangers, never asking permission to do so?  :0


Most people wouldn't support the first position because the photographer is then the cause of the person falling, not just someone observing.

The second scenario is basically street photography. If people go out into public they are free game for pictures.


----------



## Tooloose_Letrek (Dec 27, 2005)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> that's what i do... just befor running away.



Yeah, that's what I do, except for the running away part.  I'm sneaky.  I've almost been assaulted three times on the streets of Detroit.  I used to post my pics on a public gallery and there was always someone in the audience who thought I was a scoundrel.  

You guys are hardcore/brutal!  LOL.


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

> You guys are hardcore/brutal! LOL.


you haven't seed our monthly sado-maso evenings yet... 

but now seriously. I always thought there was something vicious or voyeuristic about snaping people just like that, but I'm over it, now i see people just don't give a damn or don't even notice cause i run quick, hehe.
Apparently that's not the case in Detroit. But It's big city, compared to Mtl... or maybe you were just too abvious


----------



## darin3200 (Dec 27, 2005)

There was a magnum photographer who did a whole series that he took with a hidden camera of people he was sitting across from in the subway.


----------



## darin3200 (Dec 27, 2005)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> you haven't seed our monthly sado-maso evenings yet...


We have a sado-maso evening?! Why doesn't anyone tell me about this stuff?


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

now that's an idea, eh!? Do you know a site with those pics or something, cause that'd be cool to see!
Actually i once saw this kind of reflector lens that allows you to take pics of something or someone while pointing your camera in another direction. awesome thing it was.


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

darin3200 said:
			
		

> We have a sado-maso evening?! Why doesn't anyone tell me about this stuff?


Well, you know, all those meet-up things... well... that's not quite true


----------



## danalec99 (Dec 27, 2005)

darin3200 said:
			
		

> We have a sado-maso evening?! Why doesn't anyone tell me about this stuff?


doh!!


----------



## darin3200 (Dec 27, 2005)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> now that's an idea, eh!? Do you know a site with those pics or something, cause that'd be cool to see!
> Actually i once saw this kind of reflector lens that allows you to take pics of something or someone while pointing your camera in another direction. awesome thing it was.


Check out this page
[ame="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/071483842X/ref=sib_rdr_dp/002-4105526-8873652?%5Fencoding=UTF8&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&no=283155&st=books&n=283155"]http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/071483842X/ref=sib_rdr_dp/002-4105526-8873652?%5Fencoding=UTF8&me=ATVPDKIKX0DER&no=283155&st=books&n=283155[/ame]


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 27, 2005)

thx for the link!
These are Awesome! I just checked and the book's available at a bookstore, downtown. Next time I'll be there, i'll make sure to take a closer look at it.


----------



## craig (Dec 28, 2005)

The photographer is liable for nothing. He was just shooting a story.

Personally I could never watch someone get hurt even in the least. Let alone photograph it. I definitely would have alerted him. Any photog could shoot the story without incident. There is a huge difference between the hidden camera on the subway and photographing someone getting hurt. As photographers we can say that "I am just shooting it". As humans we should consider how fragile life is.


----------



## Tooloose_Letrek (Dec 28, 2005)

Since that pothole was hardly obvious (under water) but large, it's not that much of a stretch that someone could get seriously hurt, say flip over and crash head first and suffer a severe head injury, or, if riding that bike fast enough, hit the hole and veer to the left and into the path of oncoming traffic.  

What if...that cyclist was your mate or lover and you weren't the photographer?


----------



## zedin (Dec 28, 2005)

This is sorta the debate I have always had with myself over photographing a situation or helping.  It is hard for me to take a picture when I know that I might be able to help in a situation but then again by taking the photos you can inform people of situations they might not be aware of.


----------



## celery (Dec 28, 2005)

As if the photog was the only person who knew that the pothole existed.  Many people must have passed it by over and over and no one said a thing about it's danger before.

Just because the photog was waiting to take the picture doesn't mean he should've warned the guy.  

If I were that photog, I would have taken the pic and then laughed at the guy too.  Then I would have helped him up and asked if he was alright.  

Those pictures are funny.  If you take life too seriously, it'll kill you.


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 28, 2005)

I Agree with celery. Damn, that legume _is_ smart!
...just joking, sweet.:hug::


----------



## JohnMF (Dec 28, 2005)

i think the photog used that "nothing would be done about the hole if i didnt take the photograph" as just an excuse to get a funny picture of someone falling off a bike! He couldn't have been that concern about someone falling down it and hurting themselves because he just sat there and waited for somebody to do exactly that.

Might have just been a better idea to take a picture of the pothole itself (although not as exciting)

Imagine you were that Photographer and you were laying in wait for somebody to come along and fall down the hole, then you look up and see your own mother, completely oblivious, cylcing towards it. Do you warn her? or do you wait for her to fall face first into the gutter in a rather undignified fashion?

Aww, poor mum   !!


----------



## THORHAMMER (Dec 28, 2005)

the real problem here is this guy stole my stationary exercise bike and put wheels on it before stealing it....... take another look at the pictures.....

I want it back....


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 28, 2005)

humm, sorry to say that, but this actually makes YOU the responsible for the accident. 

...and have you seen? that thread is gone HOT now! can't touch it, tis too hot hot hot!!!
...sorry. i'm tired. really tired.


----------



## darin3200 (Dec 28, 2005)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> ...and have you seen? that thread is gone HOT now! can't touch it, tis too hot hot hot!!!
> ...sorry. i'm tired. really tired.


It seems like everyone is interested in some guy falling off his bike in the rain


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 29, 2005)

thank god you didn't post a story bout him finding a kitty and bringin' it back home safe.
...that's perversity. we all gotta have our ways to unleash it... see ya at the sado-maso next week


----------



## jadin (Dec 29, 2005)

craig said:
			
		

> As humans we should consider how fragile life is.


 
Well, he was in China, there's a lot more life there... 

As for me, I'm too nice to let someone hurt themselves, I bet I'd just do it myself. Get someone to photograph me and crash myself!


----------



## Tooloose_Letrek (Dec 29, 2005)

zedin said:
			
		

> This is sorta the debate I have always had with myself over photographing a situation or helping.



I wonder what sorts of internal debates a war photographer faces.  No doubt some have been in situations where there was a clear choice between getting the pic and helping someone survive.

I have a book I haven't read (and that book has lots of company on my bookshelf) called _Witness in Our Time:  Working Lives of Documentary Photogarphers_ by Ken Light.  IT has short articles about 18 different photographers and some of the articles appear to delve into this very question.  I'll see if I can learn anything from the book, at least learn how others react.


----------



## Tooloose_Letrek (Dec 29, 2005)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> I always thought there was something vicious or voyeuristic about snaping people just like that, but I'm over it, now i see people just don't give a damn or don't even notice cause i run quick, hehe.
> Apparently that's not the case in Detroit. But It's big city, compared to Mtl... or maybe you were just too abvious



No I wasn't obvious at all as I was sitting in a car at the time, always vigilant of my surroundings.  You seem to have a very light attitude about this but might be surprised to find yourself in a situation one day where someone you didn't notice notices you and what you're doing and intends to do something about it.  

I don't believe that, as you say that people don't give a damn if they're photographed.  That sounds like an easy way for you to rationalize your actions and do what you want.


----------



## LittleMan (Dec 29, 2005)

This is why photographers need to be good story tellers also.

"I was taking these photos to warn ALL the other cyclists about the dangers of potholes and driving in the rain!"
"Oh, and is that a _bicycle approved _umbrella?!?!" :lmao:


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 29, 2005)

Tooloose_Letrek said:
			
		

> No I wasn't obvious at all as I was sitting in a car at the time, always vigilant of my surroundings. You seem to have a very light attitude about this but might be surprised to find yourself in a situation one day where someone you didn't notice notices you and what you're doing and intends to do something about it.
> 
> I don't believe that, as you say that people don't give a damn if they're photographed. That sounds like an easy way for you to rationalize your actions and do what you want.


yes, that's probably because such things never happened to me... Strangely, most of the time i take pictures very openly and obviously, and people just give me a smile and pass by, or think i'm a tourist or something. More often, they step aside thinking i'm trying to shoot the building or landscape behind them.
I do have a light attitude about it, but i fully understand that _some_ people might get frustrated. that's why i try to shoot only nice people 
But more seriously: after all, it's not like i sell those pictures or something, so it's fully legal


----------



## the nightfly (Dec 29, 2005)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> why, the photog hasn't done anything illegal



Maybe yes, maybe no.  Remember, Chinese law (common or statutory) isn't necessarily the same as American, or Canadian common law.  It may well be that, in China, you are considered to have a legal obligation to protect someone from a perceived danger.


----------



## Alexandra (Dec 29, 2005)

very possible. But maybe the photog didn't know there was a pothole, maybe he was just tryin to take pics of the other guy on his bike, but it so happened that that one got into a pothole...
Ok, i'm just short of arguments. you win on that one.


----------



## kalee (Dec 29, 2005)

what about photographers that capture war images?


----------



## THORHAMMER (Dec 29, 2005)

I want my exercycle back!!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## keller (Dec 30, 2005)

I think in some countries, if you percieve a danger, it is illegal to not warn other people (without harming yourself).

Morally, I don't really like this behaviour. The photographer could've raised awareness of the pothole by putting a sign next to it, or just warning the biker. This is one of the reasons people really don't like reporters or photojournalists (I think journalists rank 4th in "dodgy people polls")

(But I admit, the images are really funny, specially when the guy is landing on his face)


----------



## hot shot (Jan 1, 2006)

must of been a fudging big pothole casue i ride bikes off road (nun of this road  rubish) and it takes a big pot hole to throw you right off


----------



## ef2.eight (Jan 2, 2006)

I understand the  "end defines the means" theory. But come on. As humans we use common sense to make our decisions. I understand that he did this to prove that someone can get hurt because of the municipality's lack of duty. 
He could have used his camera to take pictures of the pothole and show it to the municipality. I do not know how his conscious allowed him to photography such a hurtful accident. For all we know, the guy could have broken his neck and spine. I guess this one man's ultimate extreme suffering , according to the photography, is worth proving his point. Which really isnt a valid point. I dont need to burn my hand twice to know that fire is hot and that driving blindly into a pothole will be painful. The photographer has no soul. He could have avoided it and been a hero. Hero infront of the people for saving the (his) people and hero infront of the government for being a smart citizen who saves his fellow man and contacts the municipality. Instead of cause such a havoc politcally.


----------



## hot shot (Jan 2, 2006)

Yea but its given us something to talk about. The question the needs be ask if the cyclist didnt see the pot hole( not hard to miss) is he going to see the dog or even the kid hwo runs out infrount of him ??????????


----------



## Alexandra (Jan 2, 2006)

mm, i like the way the whole thing is developping, here.

I think dom brought up an interesting point... but the thing is: the pothole was flooded with water, according to what i see on the pics. that kinda makes it unobvious.

_ef2.eight_, I totally get your point here, but i seriously doubt you can break you neck or spine or anything at all by simply falling off your bike on a (more or less ) flat street. If you fall off your bike, then off a cliff and then your bike lands on you, even then you have chances to get away in pretty good condition.
though actually _hot shot_ is our racing man here, so he might know better about injuries than i do...


----------



## Becky (Jan 2, 2006)

If deep down his point was to illustrate the danger of the pothole, then why wait for someone to have a reasonably bad accident and take pictures?

Seems to me like all he has done is make a deal out of himself rather than the issue at stake...

And its a bit cruel... if I was that cyclist I'd go and kick his sneaky ass.


----------



## hot shot (Jan 2, 2006)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> i seriously doubt you can break you neck or spine or anything at all by simply falling off your bike on a (more or less ) flat street.  actually _hot shot_ is our racing man here, so he might know better about injuries than i do...



It would depend on how the person fell, did he have a helmet on, was the helmet fitted correctly (over 50% are not) and most inportantly how fast was he going. 

Its unlikly that he would of broken his spine but a fractred head is very common with falling off bikes wich can be just as dangerous as a broken spine.  

Ive finaly been able to get on anova and look at the pictures and looking at it from that angle there is no chance of seeing a pot hole under that much water. 

You could argue that the rider did not take approparte safty precautions (did not ware a helmet) so therefor he has to take responsibilty for any injurys that he incures


----------



## jadin (Jan 2, 2006)

Take with a grain of salt I learned this watching law and order:

Under U.S. law the only way this would be illegal is if the person had a legal responsibility to help. The example given was a lifeguard has to help if someone is drowning. Someone just visiting the beach is not required to.


My plan is to watch that show until I have enough knowledge to be a lawyer.


----------



## AprilRamone (Jan 3, 2006)

This reminds me of this photographer we learned about in my History of Photography class that I took in college.  Unfortunately, I can't remember his name and I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but he took a photograph of a child starving to death with a buzzard looking/waiting for the child to die.  I can't remember what award he got for the photograph, (some fancy important one) but after that, he fell under all sorts of scrutiny and people were having all sorts of debate about how immoral the photograph was.  It's sad, but I think my professor said that he ended up killing himself later.  
As far as the pothole/biker photograph goes, I would probably say that the photographer shouldn't legally be held responsible for anything, but it is a bit immoral to do something like that just to get a photograph.


----------



## albo (Jan 3, 2006)

It's in poor taste alright, but in fairness most people probably just walked past the hole and thought... "Hmmm... that could be a bit dangerous" and never thought about it again. And if the photographer didn't want to take a photograph he would have done the same and no one would have said anything.  So the cyclist was doomed either way.... and if he just told people about the pothole it's as likely as not that the town council would just put it on the long finger or ignored him altogether... It often takes a bit of a "personal touch" to get things done with governments and an actual accident proves it's a real danger. 



			
				AprilRamone said:
			
		

> Unfortunately, I can't remember his name and I'm too lazy to look it up right now, but he took a photograph of a child starving to death with a buzzard looking/waiting for the child to die



That was Kevin Carter, the Manic Street Preachers have a song about him... I believe it was the Pulitzer Prize he won... and yes I believe he committed suicide in the end


----------



## Becky (Jan 3, 2006)

What in hell is that about? :x

Faced with the option of taking a photo of a dying child being eyed up by a hungry buzzard or giving the dying kid some food I know which one I'd choose.

Sick....


----------



## sobolik (Jan 3, 2006)

The photographer should be thrown in jail, because the photographer's mom is unavailable for a good slapping up side the head session. .  Any of you who defend the photographer are invited to demonstrate your commitment.  I will set up a hazard that you can not see and I will take a pic of you as you crash.  Come on now no back peddling. PS if you get hurt it is ok cuz it is for the greater good of demonstrating your commitment.  hey! come back here! you are back peddling!


----------



## Alexandra (Jan 3, 2006)

man, the photog didn't set it up, you're forgettin that.
feel free to set something up for me, I have the greatest ability to laugh at myself... but watch you back.


----------



## darin3200 (Jan 3, 2006)

sobolik said:
			
		

> The photographer should be thrown in jail, because the photographer's mom is unavailable for a good slapping up side the head session. .  Any of you who defend the photographer are invited to demonstrate your commitment.  I will set up a hazard that you can not see and I will take a pic of you as you crash.  Come on now no back peddling. PS if you get hurt it is ok cuz it is for the greater good of demonstrating your commitment.  hey! come back here! you are back peddling!


What does the photographer's mother have to do with this? Your example is one in which you are creating the risk solely for the purpose of taking the pictures. You are then the one actively causing what is going to happen. The photographer in China just took pictures of what was already there and what was going to happen without his action. If you pass a pothole during the day do  you just stand there warning people until it is fixed, or do you just keep on walking?

Let's assume two courses of action
1. A person sees a pothole, keeps on walking, later that day the biker hits the pothole and falls.

2. A person sees a pothole, gets out their camera and takes a picture of the person who hits the pothole.

Most people are those who would do the first course of action and no one would have a problem with it, yet people have a problem with second. Yet in both cases the biker will crash so if one option produces pictures that make the news and get us talking about potholes in china wouldn't that be better than just the guy crashing?


----------



## Don Simon (Jan 3, 2006)

darin3200 said:
			
		

> Most people are those who would do the first course of action and no one would have a problem with it, yet people have a problem with second. Yet in both cases the biker will crash so if one option produces pictures that make the news and get us talking about potholes in china wouldn't that be better than just the guy crashing?


 
I would have thought so. Anyway, we're avoiding the real issue here. Who is willing to fly out to China with me and help fill in the potholes? Maybe we could have Bob Geldof come out and say "Think of the f***ing cyclists" (then we could fill in _some_ of the potholes, with sand, and he could say what a wonderful job we'd done... ok getting off-topic now :mrgreen: ).


----------



## Alexandra (Jan 3, 2006)

Agree with Darin.

And actually we can get accused of the next similar accident cause we're not doing anything but just uselessly debating.



			
				darin3200 said:
			
		

> ...and get us talking about potholes in china...


 dunno why, but the way you phrase it really makes me laugh.


----------



## Alexandra (Jan 3, 2006)

Actually i think the attack on the photographer is a way get off the main thing: there are municipal authorities responsible for roads and everything related, including potholes, and these guys should've fixed it or at least put a sign. Which they didn't. So, municipal authorities don't do their job, nobody gives a damn and the only guy to do something to help the situation gets attacked and accused. I wouldn't call it fair.

We should all get "Free Liu Tao" t-shirts and make giant banners and send hate letters to the government. :riot smiley:
...and a riot smiley!!!


----------



## Don Simon (Jan 3, 2006)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> So, municipal authorities don't do their job, nobody gives a damn and the only guy to do something to help the situation gets attacked and accused.


 
I was expecting this to be followed by "... business as usual".


----------



## darin3200 (Jan 3, 2006)

Alexandra said:
			
		

> We should all get "Free Liu Tao" t-shirts and make giant banners and send hate letters to the government. :riot smiley:
> ...and a riot smiley!!!


Ok, but we will protest in Canada, I wouldn't want to protest in china :meh:

EDIT: and now I have to make riot smilies, I will make "peaceful protester" "police in riot gear" and last but not least "smilie with bandana over their mouth throwing a molotov cocktail" 

OH YEAH


----------



## Alexandra (Jan 3, 2006)

these are gonna be hot!!!

...and hey, we've got our own pothole drama going on here in Cn. It's like "oh, ****, I hate our roads!"  "-We have roads?"
They closed a tunnel for about 5 months and everybody knew it was rather a rocky trail... when they opened it back, thre was nothing changed, seriously, the potholes were still there, so wtf have they been doing in there? changing light bulbs?
"Hey, how many monreal road workers does it take to change a light bulb?"

ok, back to China, now.
*!!!!!FREE LIU TAO!!!!!*


----------



## orangetree (Jan 6, 2006)

that picture kills me its hilarious... id say use 2 hands next time and maybe he wouldnt have duffed it... LOL


----------



## orangetree (Jan 6, 2006)

If all they have to show in the news is a pothole victim, then real crimes must be wayyyyyy down, im moving to china LOL


----------



## JTHphoto (Jan 6, 2006)

ef2.eight said:
			
		

> I understand the "end defines the means" theory. But come on. As humans we use common sense to make our decisions. I understand that he did this to prove that someone can get hurt because of the municipality's lack of duty.
> He could have used his camera to take pictures of the pothole and show it to the municipality. I do not know how his conscious allowed him to photography such a hurtful accident. For all we know, the guy could have broken his neck and spine. I guess this one man's ultimate extreme suffering , according to the photography, is worth proving his point. Which really isnt a valid point. I dont need to burn my hand twice to know that fire is hot and that driving blindly into a pothole will be painful. The photographer has no soul. He could have avoided it and been a hero. Hero infront of the people for saving the (his) people and hero infront of the government for being a smart citizen who saves his fellow man and contacts the municipality. Instead of cause such a havoc politcally.


 
This whole debate is really interesting to me. I know I personally would not have been able to sit in wait for someone to biff it, but sometimes the only way to get anything done is to wreak havoc "politically". I don't want to get too crazy with with hypotheticals but who's to say he didn't notify the "municipality" and they ignored him? 

Our community griped about speeders on our road for years and that we needed stop signs or speed bumps or more speed traps or something and nothing ever came of it until a young boy walking home from school was killed by someone speeding - there was a stop sign up within a week. Who's the hero here? What about all the citizen's that brought this to the attention of the municipality prior to the accident?

This photographer put the situation in the spotlight and got a dangerous situation resolved, that makes him a hero in my mind. if a cyclist had to take a little humiliation and scrape some knees & elbows to get it done, that's unfortunate but he can take comfort in knowing he played a roll in saving more people from the same accident (or worse). And I bet he'll be wearing a helmet from now on when riding one handed in the rain (cautiously avoiding large pools of water...)


----------



## Alexandra (Jan 6, 2006)

JTHphoto said:
			
		

> Our community griped about speeders on our road for years and that we needed stop signs or speed bumps or more speed traps or something and nothing ever came of it until a young boy walking home from school was killed by someone speeding - there was a stop sign up within a week. Who's the hero here? What about all the citizen's that brought this to the attention of the municipality prior to the accident?


In comparison with this case and considering the impact the pictures will probably have, i say that the bicycling guy's few bruises... (can't we just give him a name, too? what about Tian?)... so Tian's few bruises, as i was saying, are a very minor threat and and a quite reasonnable sacrifice for the sake of society. As Jason said, It's sad, but that's what it takes. 

People just can't get rid of that pseudo-humanism of "the poor Tian hurt himself, that's bad" and of only looking at the individual. I don't mean to get any political/theological stuff in here, but there has to be something like placing the comunity's inetersts above the individual's. I don't mean we should all get sadistic and go harm people all around for the sake of some supposed "community" which is not one anyway, I'm just saying that we should admit that s**t happens and sometimes we can get some some good out of it.


----------

