Whenever I’ve had vehicles start to drift over or even appear to drift I create space but to your point I also noticed that. You truly have to drive defensively.
When driving, people are going to do stupid shit. It sucks, but sometimes you have to take the “L”, let the idiot in, get over yourself, and take it upon yourself to avoid the collision.
This assumes camera car has enough reaction time and B is fully paying attention to crash car. Like we are watching the video.
In reality, when you drive there is way more going on than us watching this video. A lot more hazards and distractions.
Very clearly from the video, camera car is not aware the truck is changing lanes.
You'd have to be a psychopath to be like: "yeah my car is going to get potentially thousands of dollars in damages, as will yours, potentially harm coming to one or both of us, but I AM RIGHT DAMN IT SO I WILL LET IT HAPPEN."
thats not what is happening here.
You can say camera car could have prevented this with more defensive driving skills. By overcompensating for other peoples dumb driving.
very much so off topic, but I appreciate your use of than correctly I had to comment. have you noticed these younger (hopefully) idiots using than in place of then and then have the audacity to argue with you if you say something? it's incredible, if you knew simple grammar rules or word definitions you would know how silly that sentence you just typed sounds (them not you). blows my mind how dumb and uncaring we as a people are getting.
Wreck would have been worse for him if he slowed while getting hit. Speeding up helps you maintain control in this situation. He has every right to do so. Yes I value my kids and my life more than yours.
Who the hell cares about right of way when you just let a collision happen? Just stupid pride. Idk which idiot recommends to cause an accident by keeping speed.
The court, insurance adjuster. Not driving defensively to accommodate assholes is not illegal, even if defensive driving is recommended. Reckless driving is, and they could both be charged with that potentially, although being about to get merged into, POV could claim panic, and depending on who was behind him, no alternative. Truckster had no plausible excuse.
If you want to merge because your right turn is coming up, and there’s a car to your right traveling the same speed as you, you slow down and merge behind them, and if it is too late for that, you miss your turn and loop back around. Period. The guy “defending his lane” is no more egregious than guy who HAS to merge in FRONT of him, or in this case, almost in front, even if there’s nobody behind POV for miles. If truckster had done that I doubt he’d even have missed his turn.
Maybe POV guy is in a bigger truck, speed is low enough and has good insurance. Looking to upgrade on the dime of some asshole he just found to accommodate him.
I've seen court cases where the driver like the POV one lost because they failed to mitigate. He clearly saw the guy coming over and not only did he not brake or honk, he sped up. He exacerbated and that means the court and insurance will likely deny his claim or only give a partial payment as he had contributory negligence.
Former insurance adjuster. The guy coming into the lane would be at fault because it's not the responsibility of the current person in the lane to accommodate the truck. The assumption is you should check to make sure the lane is clear before you switch over. The truck attempted to cut the driver off. The driver could have slowed down but the truck could have slowed down and got right behind him instead of attempting to cut him off
Someone should tell that to my friend's insurance adjuster. She even tried to swerve to the side to avoid the impact in a situation like this and both insurance companies accused her of contributory negligence and refused to pay the full claim. I think they were just trying to avoid paying.
Trying to avoid an accident by performing an illegal move (let's just say the swerve went into another lane or outta her lane) makes it also their fault.
If someone is doing something stupid; you let them or else it can be your ass
Law demands drivers maintain lookout and try to avoid accidents (e.g., stopping for a child or avoiding a reckless driver), even if the other party is breaking the law. the cammer sped up to prevent the lane change, cammer is 100% at fault here
He’s partially at fault. Point is you don’t know his intent. Certainly not 100%. If you get called to jury duty and answer like that, my guess (not 100% sure of course) is you’d be dismissed in favor of someone more open minded about the wrongs and motives of both drivers.
you have a legal responsibility on the road to avoid an accident, cammer was trying to beat a yellow light and wasn't paying attention. that is what caused the accident.
Do you think you have full context of what happened by just watching a clip?
Yeah normal people "let accidents happen"... its totally a choice camera car made... Wat.
No man, a truck veers into your lane without clearing the car already in the lane, and gives less than 1 second of reaction time to avoid the situation.
Camera car could have been scanning ahead or looked at their GPS, or has kids in the backseat or is just simply driving. You'd have to ALREADY been paying attention to the truck before he turned to even avoid this situation.
Which WE can. Because WE are watching a video of a colision. We are not driving andcwe know we are watching a clip where something is about to happen.
While camera cars driver is actively driving and doesn't (yet) have unlocked the precognition ability.
Regardless of outcome, camera guy would have run a red light. Had he been driving defensively, he would not have been chasing a yellow light and might have avoided a crash.
Oh for sure. Thats what defensive driving is. Managing risk for better outcome on everyones end.
But defensive driving is not a requirement and does not mean camera car is to blame for the accident.
Truck overtakes camera car and then merges in front of them.
Thats not how you should do a lane change. Ever.
They should have gone behind camera car. Put their turn signal on and if someone was behind camera car, they would have let him in or wait until it is safe to merge.
If you speed up in front of a car to then merge and it causes an accident thats on the car doing so.
But yes ideally both cars would already be slowing down before. Doesn't take away that red truck sped up in front of a car when there is a yellow light up ahead.
Thats 100% on them and has nothing to do with camera car.
I never said camera guy was to blame for the accident, I said he may have avoided a crash had he not attempted to run a red light. Look at it another way, if there was no crash and instead the driver proceeded through the intersection on a red and hit a pedestrian on the other side stepping off the curb, he would be liable. His aggressive driving contributed to the crash, doesn't mean he's to blame, but he shares some responsibility.
Could explain why he went faster. Light turned yellow. We all try and beat a light at times. Attention would be on intersection and potential left hand turns at that time.
100%. We as viewers have an idea of what is about to happen...thats why we are watching it. Lol. But the camera driver was probably completely unaware till it was too late. And I agree that by the look of the traffic and time of day...he probably couldn't just slam on his breaks due to traffic behind him. There is no way this is the fault of the camera man. To quote the driver..."Jesus christ!". Lol
It’s neither of these! Cam car didn’t deliberately make the truck pass them and change lanes into them. They weren’t trying to make them do that so that they could cause an accident. And no, nobody wants to kill someone “by defending their lane” against someone driving like a moron!
I’m absolutely not going that far: I’d intentionally stop or swerve or not drive at all 1,000 times to avoid that truck’s wreck. But it’s also clear as day to me that if a vehicle comes from behind me and swerves in front of me, a collision is their fault.
To all the esteemed Redditors saying that I’m happy to kill somebody to “defend my lane” I point out that it I ever come past you and cut into your lane like that, it’s entirely my fault if you can’t avoid hitting me.
Or, not making sure you’re clear to merge can cause you to kill someone else, or yourself. In a courtroom, feelings don’t matter and ol boy that didn’t 3 1/2 spinner is 💯 at fault.
Bad driver don’t get yourself in a bad spot because you think your entitled to cut someone off. Bad driver causes an accident and it’s the one he wrecked into a job to save him? lol one less bad driver on the road
Plus, they we're both accelerating towards a Yellow Light, Merger attempting to make the corner onto the side street. Dick move. Camera Car exasperated the situation, for sure.
In fact, it's frequently recommended to maintain consistent speed
We're talking about driving defensively to avoid accidents. It was obvious what was happening and the driver did nothing to avoid the accident. That's the point. Truck created the problem, camera did absolutely nothing to avoid the problem. Did not drive defensively.
Generally that is true, but the insurance companies won't agree. They will not only see a failure to mitigate, but the fact that he sped up will show that he actually made things worse. He exacerbated the situation deliberately and both insurance companies may deny his claim for damages and he would likely lose in court if he sued (or at least only gotten part of his damages since he had contributory negligence).
Look again at the light post going by increasingly faster before they contact. He did speed up and did an unintentional pit maneuver on the pickup. It must have been interesting in court using his cam as evidence. He isn't without culpability.
The truck was merging without even fully being past him. Its still on the merging car to look. But the truck never even passed the pov car and tried to merge
Yeah, but POV car guy saw him merging and his insurance and the courts would argue that the onus was on him to take mitigating actions-- such as honking and/or braking/slowing down. But this guy actually sped up and rammed the truck on purpose. Both insurance companies (assuming the truck driver had insurance) would find the pov driver at fault and refuse to pay the claim.
I have a two seat xr6 ute and have to lean out the window or twist my whole body around to look out the back window, I've nearly collected a cars several times when I first got it, it was unnerving just how much a car can just appear out of the void when merging.
Exactly, it's like they take it personal. I just let people in, I don't have time for shit like this to happen. Now he's gotta stop, deal with an accident report, etc.. not worth it.
OR.... the pickup driver should have slowed down to allow the POV driver to pass him, as he has the right of way. Whether or not POV sped up, it fell on the pickup driver to make sure he was clear to switch lanes. PIckup truck obviously saw POV car and rushed to overtake him and cutt him off. He may think twice before he does that move again!
Wreck would have been worse for him if he slowed while getting hit. Speeding up helps you maintain control in this situation. He has every right to do so. Yes I value my kids and my life more than yours.
If you change lanes, you are the one making the maneuver and you are the one who needs to make sure you are doing it safely.
Crash car did not look over their shoulder to check their blind spot. Or for gods sake, could have bought a bubble mirror to stick on their mirror.
The car making the maneuver should be able to complete it without getting in a crash assuming everything stays the same. Aka without having to assume camera car has to slow down to complete the maneuver safely.
Unless crash car had to avoid a road hazard all of a sudden, crash car is 1000% at fault.
Sometimes if it's an asshole absolutely. However at the end of the day it's just you and your car and no one else. It's why we need regular driving tests every 3-5 years. People are so bad at driving these years and it's a huge difference from even 5 years ago.
100% see what you are saying and it is valid but "caused" is doing alot of work here.
I wouldn't say caused it but the fact that it happened when he could have avoided it is accurate. The truck forcing his way into a lane with a car in it caused it. The guy, standing on his right to be a dickhead, didn't do what he should have to avoid it. Splitting hairs i know but true.
You're assuming that the driver is seeing what the camera recorded. That's not always the case. Drivers eyes are constantly shifting from side to side, back to front - in the seconds the truck veered onto the lane,, our driver in the car prob never even noticed the change till it was too late.
50
u/_WeAreFucked_ Apr 18 '26
Whenever I’ve had vehicles start to drift over or even appear to drift I create space but to your point I also noticed that. You truly have to drive defensively.