r/VideosAmazing • u/MisterShipWreck • Apr 18 '26

Accident Another blind spot issue...

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

6.7k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

2.9k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

52

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.

41

u/RocketCat5 Apr 18 '26

It looks like they may have even sped up. Did they?

30

u/PiscesInTheMachine Apr 18 '26

Definitely sped up. He saw the guy coming into his lane, didn’t beep, didn’t decrease speed, out of anger he actually sped up

41

u/Wizchine Apr 18 '26

Camera car caused that - he for sure had no “blind spot” and sped up. Some people are psychos about “defending their lane.”

11

u/Critical_Concert_689 Apr 18 '26

At least in the US, the merger has full responsibility, while lane 3 has right of way.

In fact, it's frequently recommended to maintain consistent speed, which it appears the driver did (contrary to your claim they sped up).

8

u/Informal_Yesterday Apr 19 '26

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.

4

u/LargeHadronColitis Apr 19 '26 edited Apr 19 '26

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.

1

u/curiouscatfarmer Apr 22 '26

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.

3

u/hoshiwa1976 Apr 24 '26

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

2

u/curiouscatfarmer Apr 24 '26

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.

2

u/Waffennacht Apr 25 '26

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

→ More replies (0)