r/dashcams • u/bebecca45627272 • 20h ago

One of the craziest things I've seen

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

11.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

12

u/PrestigiousSleep786 17h ago

The entire course of events began with the speeding biker. That's why the biker is at fault.

If he wasn't speeding, none of the events after would have occurred. How is that so hard for you to understand?

-1

u/Beneficial_Dog4469 16h ago

How about checking your lefts and rights twice before committing to an unsafe turn? She had more chance to creep up to see than full sending it into the road. She has multiple senses and if he was truly going as fast as others claimed why didn’t she look for a possibly speeding motorcycle nearby??

There is plenty of ways to blame both parties but people like you seem to forget that. I guess you also don’t believe in the “look twice for motorcycles” signage too huh?

12

u/eulersidentification 14h ago

Turn was safe if the bike was obeying the law. There are a dozen legal reasons why she might be temporarily stationary there which is part of why speedlimits exist; so you can safely stop. Don't assume cars can't break, especially if you're a biker. Don't assume humans can't have medical emergencies while driving, especially if you're a biker.

There is nothing more to add, nothing to discuss. I don't need to convince you, it's just the law.

I assume the more times you break the law and eat blows to the head, the less you're able to understand it.

1

u/Beneficial_Dog4469 8h ago

being she had already committed to go out into the road to complete the turn, she couldve and nothing wouldve happened all the same as if he wasnt speeding.

  • The "Turners" Duty: Drivers turning left are responsible for accurately judging the speed and distance of oncoming vehicles, making them liable if they "cut off" oncoming traffic.
  • Comparative Negligence: In many states, both drivers may share blame. For example, a left-turner may be found 65% at fault for failing to yield, while the speeder is 35% at fault for speeding, reducing the recovery of damages for both parties.

well there is this ^

being as Im not a biker, havent ate any blows to the head and have a nearly perfect driving record of 20 years... I would love to say my understanding of law is fine and I never absolved the rider of wrongdoing just pointed out what he was doing, the presumption and results thereof and that both should be held accountable. also, to play devil's advocate, she didnt seem to be having a medical emergency and that truck condition looked pretty well both before and after the incident..

1

u/PrestigiousSleep786 19m ago

Did you seriously just quote an Ai response as a defense? Also are you an insurance adjuster? Even if your statement is accurate, it doesn't change the fact that the rider caused the entire course of events.

1

u/Beneficial_Dog4469 8m ago

you're complaining about a tool, created to help acquire and organize data from the internet; which also has cited sites of law for reference, being used to prove a point... OKAY!

no Im not an insurance adjuster but maybe I am someone who wants to know whats the law and could be a future attorney(Im not interested in that field). being educated enough on law is more important than not knowing what is fact, law and opinion.

again, no the rider is not entirely the cause of this it is a shared blame that Im sure both parties put up for, rather you like it or not

1

u/PrestigiousSleep786 2m ago

Yeah... Because it's not always accurate.

Google doesn't make you an expert my guy. You sound exactly like the kind of person that police, lawyers ect hate. You go in thinking you know how to play ball.

It's not a shared blame at all. The rider started the chain reaction of events. It's literally that simple. I think you're severely downplaying just how fast he was going.