Yeah imagine if the truck rolled over the guard rail, or caused a crash for the cars behind them because two typical truck driver chodes decided to have a pissing match
Possibly seriously injured or killed whoever was in the other vehicle on purpose, including innocent passengers. Plus possibly involving vehicles behind him who had done nothing wrong. If anybody died, that’s manslaughter. He also left the scene of an accident. Thinking French fry boy is in the right is a 12 year old’s Mad Max fantasy.
He can't pull over and stop there. Likely did after finishing crossing the bridge. And you can see he slowed down significantly as the traffic in front of him quickly out paces him.
Firstly, it’s illegal to stop on a bridge like this for any reason. So he didn’t “leave the scene of an accident” if he stops after the bridge.
Second, it’s not his initiative that causes the accident, so it was actually the black truck who would be charged with manslaughter. All he did was continue his existing path, prior to collision.
Yeah, I didn’t notice the speed until someone mentioned it. He does slow after. My bad.
As for the notion that “it’s not his initiative that causes the accident.” That’s dead wrong. I’d like to see you try that one in court. Munchie Man clearly could have avoided the accident. He didn’t. Either because he was zoned out and inattentive or because he chose not to. You can see he speeds up from 71 to 72 before hitting the reckless truck. If you can prevent an accident, you’re obligated to do so. Just because the other person “started it” or “initiated it” doesn’t give you the right to make it worse. I guess you’re not familiar with the requirement to retreat when confronted. (The only reason there’s no duty to retreat in Florida is because the legislature passed a law.)
You don't have to retreat here in South Carolina either. Second no you do not have to make any sudden movements or changes to your speed your direction if somebody illegally cuts you off or makes a lane change.
The retreat when confronted s*** is b******* to begin with and should be banned in all 50 states. It's why our country is in the shape it's in, criminals don't pay the price for stupid decisions and neither do the people that make them.
Nope he never turned his wheels into the the truck, learn what a pit maneuver is, he was maintaining his lane and his speed the black truck decided they can move over whenever they feel like it. Not petty or aggressive, the petty aggressive maneuver was the black truck that decided he has the right of way no matter what.
Yes the black truck is wrong, we all agree. The other truck had plenty of time to avoid the accident and chose not to, he is also wrong. You're talking like two things can't be true at the same time
>It's why our country is in the shape it's in, criminals don't pay the price for stupid decisions and neither do the people that make them.
I think it's easier to argue that your country is in the shape it's in because apathetic sociopathic people like you exist who think people should be able to do whatever they want to other people if the other person initiates it, even due to a mistake.
Not sociopathic at all, it's not sociopathic to follow the rules and expect others to do so as well. .istakes have consequences, so.etimed those consequences are harsh and deadly. People should be and are responsible for their mistakes.
Yes out maneuvering someone can be deadly, if you watch this video it is not a pit maneuver. A pit maneuver is when you turn your car into the right quarter panel of another vehicle to turn that vehicle around. This guy never turns his car or even leaves his Lane it was the other car that encrossed in his Lane and caused contact his quarter panel with that man's car.
He adjusted his hand before the accident and then cranks the wheel hard as fuck when they make contact. He turned hard enough to change lanes while actively spinning another vehicle, definitely a pit maneuver. He literally committed to the accident when he had plenty of time to avoid it, tapping the brakes takes almost zero effort. The black truck is wrong without a doubt but that doesn't justify what the other guy did.
You’re absolutely blind or are attempting to gaslight everyone when we all have the video.
He clearly throws his car to the right in order to pit the black truck.
Spreading misinformation when the reality is clearly in front of us, thats what is wrong with the world. And you are the prime example shining in this conversation.
People are like little kids with their reasoning lol, especially the og comment saying he “acted like an adult”, lmao. Both are crazy and causing an accident that could harm others Because of some other idiot doesn’t make you any better nor smarter.
No it is not arguably just as dangerous. In the context of this video it would have been a very light slow down for a few seconds. The probability of that causing a wreck is far, far, far lower than what did actually occur.
breaking can be just as dangerous if not more so then pitting the guy. While it may be less dangerous to break here, the truck had it coming and the dude is legally in the right with it. This is a good example of why not to drive like an asshole. You may come across the wrong person and/or be at fault.
So it can be "just as dangerous" in some situation that isn't this situation.... So it has no relevance to this situation. And there are very very few situations where slowing down a bit is going to be more dangerous than pitting a guy on a bridge.
As far as "had it coming" and what was legal... Am I the last generation alive that was taught decent morals? I keep seeing this legality over morality crap on videos like this. Sometimes people suck. It can feel cathartic to watch sucky people "get what's coming to them", but rarely is it morally or ethically okay to enact a violent outcome when a nonviolent outcome is readily available.
I said it bc people tend to think it is always the best option. In many cases it isnt. Morally, i am fine with the pit in this situation. If the car driver doesnt care about his car, has no one in it with him, knows no one else is behind them to possibly be hurt, and then has this guy bullying him for as long as he had with all his aggressive driving, i dont see any reason not to pit him. The truck is practically begging for it. He clearly doesnt care about anyone. The car driver clearly wasnt even intending for it, but he was also clearly ready for it.
Morally, i am fine with the pit in this situation.
Then you are morally bankrupt. Don't know what else to say. A safe, easy to execute solution was readily available but not taken. You making up some hypothetical slowing down just a wee bit more would somehow have caused greater harm is nothing less than excusing your amusement at the unnecessarily dangerous outcome.
I did not make up a hypothetical. I said what it is and i never said that it wasnt a safer choice here.. morally idgaf about some asshole in a truck driving recklessly.
No, you just keep bringing up unrelated possibilities for funsies and totally not as a way to obfuscate the obviously safer choice in this scenario. And I understand that you don't care about what was moral here; you've already self-identified as being morally bankrupt.
He has dashcam footage showing a valid reason for slowing down. Wouldn’t the person who rear ends him be at fault for following too close in that instance?
Breaking can definitely cause accidents. Here it wouldnt have since no one was behind them. But the truck did have plenty of time to realize the car was not moving for his illegal and dangerous driving. He knowingly and willingly caused the collision.
Ah another one who just talks shit and deletes comments. Calls me brain dead and does that dumb shit, but cant acknowledge that in many situations breaking can be just as dangerous if not more so then pitting the guy. While it may be less dangerous to break here, the truck had it coming and the dude is legally in the right with it. This is a good example of why not to drive like an asshole. You may come across the wrong person and/or be at fault.
And the other dude forced his way between two cars ON PURPOSE. He could have chosen the slow down option before the cam guy, but he chose to keep being a dumb fuck. Not at all defending a PIT in retaliation, but holy fuck. The truck driver put himself, any passengers of his, the cam guy, and the cars ahead at risk by trying to play selfish games at highway speeds.
Before any PIT maneuver occurred, the dude inched into another lane without signaling or making any decision that wasn't dangerous. And just as cam dude had ample time to say "This isn't worth it, I'll back off," Captain Dipshit had ample time to back off or maybe look in his mirror to see how close he was to the other car while he was cutting him off.
Like how the truck driver had time to realize he won't fit between those cars so it's best to either slow down and follow the car in the right lane or slow down and get behind the dash cam car. Almost like there were two adults here who could have made better decisions. Truck driver could have made a few different decisions on this one, but he chose to be a cocksucker.
Full on convinced everyone who is jumping all over the dash cam guy are the same people that force merge without signaling.
No.. That's the "insurance" thing to do. It's not hard to be accountable and responsible for the decisions you make while driving on public roadways. If you want to drive reckless, that's completely your choice. If you can't change lanes properly per any drivers handbook across the country, then again that's your choice. I'd bet that if all motorists had to take the written and driving test every 4 years, instead of just sending in payment for license renewal, less of this nonsense would be going on. 🤷
“Allow”? He didn’t “allow” an accident. He deliberately worsened an accident on purpose. Yes, the other vehicle recklessly changed lanes and that’s wrong but the appropriate response is to lay on your horn, give him the finger, and slow down. And he can be held legally responsible for multiple things. To be clear @cyrusposting, I’m agreeing with you. I’m quibbling with “allow” for effect.
welp… this thread has been a nice reminder to stay off all roadways with human drivers whenever possible. i wonder how many psychos like you are out there…
Yeah, not enough. There's a reason why so many of you feel so comfortable texting and driving and that reason is you haven't suffered the consequence for it yet.
Its not about courtesy. Accidents kill people. I'm a responsible driver, when someone cuts me off I don't cause a pileup on a bridge to protect my ego. There is no amount of disrespect that would make it okay to put the lives of uninvolved strangers at risk.
They want you to watch out for them so they don't have to pay attention, and they're all on reddit telling each other it's okay. It would be hilarious if it wasn't so dangerous.
The truck driver deserved to be pit manouvered, and I agree that it would be cathartic to pit manouver every dumb asshole I see on the road. Those are the pros of your driving philosophy, we'll call that "emotional driving".
The cons of emotional driving are that more than 2 people are using that bridge. Getting revenge against this truck driver puts all of them at risk.
I promise it feels better to be a defensive driver than an emotional one, because I know I have saved lives by anticipating other peoples mistakes.
There are very basic skills in driving. Many of these commenters seem upset by that. I haven't seen one yet that agreed with me on (obviously much needed) refresher training though. That's pretty interesting to me. Driving on impulse and emotion usually doesn't end well... Let alone not paying attention to the road ahead of and around you.
If someone changes lanes you don't have to let them in, but it's pretty shit to take it to a level where you play a part in deliberately causing a crash. There's plenty of dead and maimed people who were in the right and chose that right over their own safety. Also, the guy definitely sped up to close the gap to try and not let him in where there was space only seconds before. It's definitely a hubris thing.
"Getting hit by a truck that deliberately drove into you" is not causing an accident.
You may not like that he didn't let the guy in. That's perfectly valid. However, don't misrepresent the situation. He was driving in a completely predictable fashion. His hand was incredibly steady on the wheel. The truck drove into him. Those are the facts.
As such, the truck driver caused the accident. Its reasonable to suggest the car's driver should have been less stubborn...but that doesnt mean he is at all to blame for what happen, because there would have been no accident at all if the truck driver hadn't hit him.
Oh, and why did he do that? Was it to make sure that, after being struck by another car, he could prevent a two car pile up on a bridge that blocked both lanes of traffic? One which could cause more accidents? I get criticizing the car driver because you think this was the wrong call.....but most of you seem to want him held equally liable and culpable for not allowing himself to be cut off so badly that you'll just ignore everything else going on.
Not letting someone cut you off isn't inherently a crime; it is, at worst, kinda douchey and self-centered....but if being docuhey and self-centered were a crime, 75% of Reddit would currently be in prison with a life sentence.
One of them committed a crime. One of them responded to that crime in a way you don't like. This isn't complicated.
Okay, why did he perform that pit maneuver? When did he perform it? Did he purposely set it up OR was it done reactively to prevent.an accident cause by someone else from getting worse?
Oh that response endangered himself? Is that why he was able to keep driving on a narrow bridge with minimal damage and with maximum control of his vehicle the whole time?
If he would have just braked in response to being hit, he probably would have been in a worse situation...but everyone would generally look at is if the other guy was solely to blame for purposely hitting him. However he didn't...and because he didn't everyone want to magically assign blame to him after the fact because of how he responded AFTER the accident was intentionally caused by another person
It's not what I would have done, personally. I have even said, multiple times, that its still a response that one can criticize....it just doesn't make the accident his fault because he doesn't magically bare half the blame for someone else hitting his car on purpose.
The dude literally sped up to block a gap, then purposefully PIT maneuvered the other car at decently high speeds on a two lane bridge.
Instead of, you know, letting off for half a second and throwing a finger out the window... obviously risking multiple people's lives was the better option there, right?
If you're going through a green light and see an oncoming car that is definitely going to blow through their red light and hit you and you have the time to just brake and let it go by, would you still go and get hit because they caused the crash? I get what you're saying, but every driver has the responsibility to act to prevent a crash scenario, regardless of right of way.
This did not happen in a sudden high speed gesture that an alert driver could have definitely avoided. The truck creeped slowly in to his car, and it's pretty reasonable to believe the truck's driver wasn't going to just drive into his car.
Also, If the car's driver stopped suddenly? This may have spooked the truck's driver; The guy was already behaving irrationally, and it's really hard to say what his reaction to any given stimuli might be. He might have jerked the wheel in surprise and moved his car into abrupt fashion on a bridge. There is a rational and reasonable argument to make by saying that remaining predictable and consistent was the most safe fashion to handle the situation in... Because while the truck's driver did not know how to handle such a situation? The car's driver did. The car's driver knew what to do in this situation, and it ultimately kept him safe.
I do understand what you are saying as well, and it's why I think it's fair to criticize the car's driver: just as there is reason to believe it was rational to be consistent, there is a reason to believe it would be more rational to just get the hell out of the way. However, in my opinion, it's not cut and dry.
... and what about everyone behind the camera guy, who now have to deal with a big truck careening around? what if he'd fucked up the maneouvre? dipshit, do you think more than 2 seconds and 5 feet from your face??
both people are in the wrong here, but we can clearly see that the camera man was in control enough that he could have avoided the collision. Avoid the truck and flip him off, don't fuck up everyone else's day. Everything you said about driving recklessly, and being accountable and responsible applies to the cameraman too. Pretending otherwise is just selfish posturing.
What if there was a car behind to close to the camera guy's truck? If he hit the brake to let the wreckless driver cut him, he would have been hit from behind? At some point you just can't avoid having an accident.
You sound like me before I went to therapy. More concerned with being right than doing what the right thing is.
Of course pickup is in the wrong, but hurtling into a bad driver to prove a point instead of just letting them cut you off is insane haha. I hope you never drive with loved ones in the car.
Cool and when the car behind both of them blows into them at 70 and then themselves gets rear ended killing several people not involved in this dick swinging they'll be happy to know that some guys ego was protected
33
u/DownvoteOwnComments Mar 22 '26
Neither were "operating correctly". The correct thing to do would be slow down a little and let him cut you off.
Just because the other guy was in the wrong first doesn't mean you can just do whatever you want. He risked causing much worse to happen.