|
ijustam posted:This is the kind of poo poo that gets people killed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA7BASFqXIw So the Camaro is certainly 100% at fault here, but that wreck would have never happened if the pickup truck driver hadn't decided to get his revenge on the Camaro's early stupidity by pacing the semi to keep him back there.
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 21:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:32 |
|
|
The pickup driver was just as big a cause of that crash as the Camero. How long was he going to speed match the truck and hold up the entire highway?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
Is what the van did against the law in the US? It's called "Nötigung" in German, forcing someone into something they don't want (for example, driving slowly). edit: I guess 'coercion' is the word? wayfinder fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
Cakefool posted:The pickup driver was just as big a cause of that crash as the Camero. How long was he going to speed match the truck and hold up the entire highway? Yes, the guy being passive aggressive was just as much at fault as the guy who tried to pass on the grass median and wound up losing control of his car.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Is what the van did against the law in the US? It's called "Nötigung" in German, forcing someone into something they don't want (for example, driving slowly). I think it's legal, even though it's a massive rear end in a top hat move. I've certainly never seen anyone get ticketed for it. My own bitch from yesterday: why do people love to hang out in my blind spot? Even when I change speed? I need to change lanes for the upcoming exit, so just hold your speed and I'll make it work. But, no, you just love to sit RIGHT loving BESIDE ME.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 21:44
|
|
|
The Locator posted:So the Camaro is certainly 100% at fault here, but that wreck would have never happened if the pickup truck driver hadn't decided to get his revenge on the Camaro's early stupidity by pacing the semi to keep him back there. The pickup gunned it when the Camaro tried to cram in as well. They're both shitcocks and I hope both drivers earned long hospital stays. I mean yeah get pissed off at rear end in a top hat drivers, but it's irresponsible to risk everyone's life just to prove a point.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
The real victim here is the semi who got caught in the crossfire
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
ijustam posted:The real victim here is the semi who got caught in the crossfire Totally. You can picture him/her sitting in the cab repeating to themselves, "please don't, please don't, please don't, please don't..."
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 22:35
|
|
|
What I couldn't believe was the guy with the dashcam staying right with them. I'd have been in the right lane and backed way off after watching all that nonsense, KNOWING that was bound to happen. Of course then we wouldn't have sweet sweet video on the internet. But yeah the truck going passive aggressive on the camaro was really loving stupid. It's like the saying "Never argue with ignorant people - they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience". That's exactly what just happened. The pickup fooled himself into being just as terrible as the camaro.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 22:49
|
|
|
LloydDobler posted:But yeah the truck going passive aggressive on the camaro was really loving stupid. It's like the saying "Never argue with ignorant people - they'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience". That's exactly what just happened. The pickup fooled himself into being just as terrible as the camaro. My dad would have done the exact same thing. It's a mindset of self-righteously ensuring that bad drivers don't get 'rewarded' for their behavior. If that truck had gotten out of the way, then the Camaro would have seen a positive outcome from passing on the right, merging into someone, and tailgating them, and be encouraged to do it again in the future.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 22:53
|
|
|
Hargrimm posted:My dad would have done the exact same thing. It's a mindset of self-righteously ensuring that bad drivers don't get 'rewarded' for their behavior. If that truck had gotten out of the way, then the Camaro would have seen a positive outcome from passing on the right, merging into someone, and tailgating them, and be encouraged to do it again in the future. So really we should be thanking that truck driver for sacrificing himself for the greater good!
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 22:55
|
|
|
"Compact"
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:11
|
|
|
Either compact spot should be banned or no compacts parked in compact spots should be towed on sight. Compact spots are so drat common now and nothing really fit in them. My Mazda 2 kind of fills them up. Look, the smart is almost too wide for that loving spot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:13
|
|
|
nm posted:Either compact spot should be banned or no compacts parked in compact spots should be towed on sight. "Compact" is code for "Whoever painted the lines hosed up and painted these too narrow". e. My Jeep fits into compact spots just fine.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Safety Dance posted:"Compact" is code for "Whoever painted the lines hosed up and painted these too narrow". Depends on the spot. I parked in a compact spot last night in the 2 and pulled all the way in, my rear bumper was flush with the end of the spot.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
*ahem*   Also, that smart car is technically a 2 seater. straight to the junkyard with it! That spot is designated for a compact like the camaro, or subcompact like the mustang. not your fancy 2 seaters like the smart car or veyron. Powershift fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Apr 26, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
Safety Dance posted:"Compact" is code for "Whoever painted the lines hosed up and painted these too narrow". It's actually a thing where the developer can't fit the number of parking spots required on their development, so they bribe the city inspectors to accept 'x' number of 'compact' spots in order to squeeze enough parking spots onto the development to meet code. It's loving stupid, and they should force the developers to stop building more building on a site than they legally should be building an a site.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:40
|
|
|
The Locator posted:It's actually a thing where the developer can't fit the number of parking spots required on their development, so they bribe the city inspectors to accept 'x' number of 'compact' spots in order to squeeze enough parking spots onto the development to meet code. It's loving stupid, and they should force the developers to stop building more building on a site than they legally should be building an a site. Or, you know, explicitly authorized by regulation. Not sure why you'd think it's some nefarious deal with inspectors. I pulled three random jurisdictions near me, and "[jurisdiction] parking compact" got me the relevant regulation in one try. http://www.montgomeryplanning.org/development/zoning/documents/59-7_Jan25_ZAPdraft.pdf Up to 10 percent of all required spaces may be compact spaces. http://alexandriava.gov/uploadedFiles/tes/info/Code.pdf Parking facilities providing for ten or more required off-street parking spaces for a non-retail use may provide up to 75 percent of the required spaces as compact car parking spaces. Parking facilities providing ten or more required off-street parking spaces for a retail use may provide up to 30 percent of the required spaces as compact car parking spaces http://www.dcregs.dc.gov/Gateway/RuleHome.aspx?RuleNumber=11-2115 2115.2 Any accessory parking area or accessory garage containing twenty-five (25) or more required parking spaces may designate up to forty percent (40%) of the parking spaces for compact cars.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
The Locator posted:It's actually a thing where the developer can't fit the number of parking spots required on their development, so they bribe the city inspectors to accept 'x' number of 'compact' spots in order to squeeze enough parking spots onto the development to meet code. It's loving stupid, and they should force the developers to stop building more building on a site than they legally should be building an a site. Actually, they should get rid of the minimum spot requirements or reduce them. They're a huge reason why our cities are so loving huge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
MrOnBicycle posted:Volvo city safety? Nope -- GM Collision Mitigation Braking It works well, just disconcerting when it happens.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 00:24
|
|
|
Devor posted:Or, you know, explicitly authorized by regulation. Not sure why you'd think it's some nefarious deal with inspectors. I pulled three random jurisdictions near me, and "[jurisdiction] parking compact" got me the relevant regulation in one try. The nefarious part was a bit facetious on my part, but I used to do consulting work that allowed me in on a lot of meetings with developers where they specifically talked about getting exemptions to go way over on the number of parking spots so that they could fit 'x' more units in that apartment/condo complex. It was so common that I was surprised when they didn't get an exception to overbuild relative to the number of normal sized parking spots. nm posted:Actually, they should get rid of the minimum spot requirements or reduce them. They're a huge reason why our cities are so loving huge. Except that the mess made when there isn't enough parking for the number of units (in residential) or expected traffic in stores (for commercial) is unbelievable. The rules about minimum parking were created to alleviate the giant mess made in surrounding neighborhoods when developments are 'underparked'.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 00:31
|
|
|
xzzy posted:They're both shitcocks and I hope both drivers earned long hospital stays. Wait - I'm thoroughly confused. Shouldn't causing a potentially fatal accident be covered under "poo poo that would normally be bad but is OK if someone is going too slow in the left lane" like we established a few pages back?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 00:40
|
|
|
wayfinder posted:Is what the van did against the law in the US? It's called "Nötigung" in German, forcing someone into something they don't want (for example, driving slowly). In some states, it actually is illegal to drive in the left (inside) lane on highways and freeways unless you are passing someone, or to otherwise obstruct the flow of traffic. You can theoretically even be cited both for speeding and for obstructing traffic at the same time in some places, if you're speeding in the left lane but still unnecessarily blocking faster cars behind you. However, the reality is that left lane hogs are rarely given tickets; it's not as cut-and-dried as a speeding ticket, which means more people will fight them in court, which means the system makes less money. Since the primary goal of traffic enforcement in the US is making money, getting ticketed for more nebulous infractions is rare unless they are particularly egregious (or the cops think they can bust you for DUI or a drug charge and need probable cause to stop you). nm posted:Depends on the spot. I parked in a compact spot last night in the 2 and pulled all the way in, my rear bumper was flush with the end of the spot. The garage at my office has compact spaces that are exactly the same size as all of the other spaces; they're the last few spaces at the end of each row and are probably marked that way to try to discourage people from parking larger vehicles there because it makes navigating the corners harder. (Obviously, those spots are always full of giant pickups and SUVs sticking a foot or two into the aisle on both sides.)
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
Ugh, I hate driving in bad weather. Seems like some people don't loving get it. Its been raining pretty decently add day, in a state that usually doesn't get much rain. Much of the water ended up standing on the highway instead of draining off, causing pretty bad visibility due to road spray, a number of instances where traffic dropped to 30mph from 75 due to large areas of deep standing water, and I saw about a half dozen cars that spun off the road, likely from hydroplaining. Halfway through my trip some bro in a lifted F150 comes right up my rear end as I'm passing some traffic. Apparently I wasn't passing fast enough because as soon as I was about to merge back right safely, mr brotruck cuts off the traffic in the right, swings around me, gets in-front of me (behind another car), and brake checks me. Of course, I was expecting this as soon as he starting to whip around, and backed off. Good thing two, because he started to lose it when brake checking me, and nearly became another person in a ditch. As he whipped back into the right lane to speed off, I hoped he was getting off at the next exit before his idiocy caused a major pileup on the only route for miles.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 00:51
|
|
|
ijustam posted:The real victim here is the semi who got caught in the crossfire Don't worry, thanks to the CSA point system, he got hit with 96 points right off the bat.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 01:11
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 01:20
|
|
|
ijustam posted:This is the kind of poo poo that gets people killed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pA7BASFqXIw Yeah pickup was an rear end in a top hat since he could have easily passed the truck but chose to hold the car back longer. Really if you see someone being that aggressive you should let them through. I know I spoke about slowing down one time when I was being tailgated, but that only happened once, it was low traffic, I didn't hold the guy back more than a couple seconds, it actually loving worked, it's less of a dick move than brake checking, and I admit is kind of an rear end in a top hat thing to do. LloydDobler posted:What I couldn't believe was the guy with the dashcam staying right with them. I'd have been in the right lane and backed way off after watching all that nonsense, KNOWING that was bound to happen. Of course then we wouldn't have sweet sweet video on the internet. "Well if I was there. . ." sounds like bullshit, can you honestly say that you have not seen that kind of aggression so often every day that your first reaction would be think "this is unsafe"? If I was there I would just roll my eyes, think "oh another tailgater", and continue on my way without thinking about it until the accident. Geoj posted:Wait - I'm thoroughly confused. Shouldn't causing a potentially fatal accident be covered under "poo poo that would normally be bad but is OK if someone is going too slow in the left lane" like we established a few pages back? The general consensus of this thread usually says "don't be a dick" (unless it's a BMW). Not Wolverine fucked around with this message at 01:48 on Apr 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 01:44
|
|
|
Crotch Fruit posted:The general consensus of this thread usually says "don't be a dick" (unless it's a BMW). You must have missed the page and a half of "aggressively tailgating someone you've deemed as going too slow in the left lane is OK" derail about three or four pages back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 01:54
|
|
|
Geoj posted:You must have missed the page and a half of "aggressively tailgating someone you've deemed as going too slow in the left lane is OK" derail about three or four pages back. Actually I'm pretty sure I was an active part of that when I said that slowing down is better than brake checking and people said that slowing down sucks too.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 02:03
|
|
|
The guy in the ambulance is like half-way out: "should I get out now or and I gonna have to chase em?"
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
Crotch Fruit posted:
I don't know if it's because the camera has a really wide lens or something but it does appear the camera car got quite close to the back of the Camaro at one point. Probably not a great idea when there is semi in the next lane
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 02:44
|
|
|
dissss posted:I don't know if it's because the camera has a really wide lens or something but it does appear the camera car got quite close to the back of the Camaro at one point. Probably not a great idea when there is semi in the next lane The guy with the dashcam was daydreaming hard enough to answer his phone just as the accident started to play out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 03:09
|
|
|
Some of the Sheep posted:The guy with the dashcam was daydreaming hard enough to answer his phone just as the accident started to play out. Yeah his reaction times were so loving slow and he seemed really unaware. To be honest, I like the decision the pickup driver made on some level of my being. I feel the punishment (blocking the Camaro in and making the driver furious) fit the crime. The accident as a result was bad but inconveniencing the Camaro for a few minutes on it's own was justified to me in a way. I wish I could explain the feeling I have about this in a clearer way but I'm dumb at words.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Powershift posted:*ahem* How the hell is a Camaro considered a compact?
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 03:55
|
|
|
mariooncrack posted:How the hell is a Camaro considered a compact? I think those classifications are done partically on interior volume
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 03:59
|
|
|
dissss posted:I think those classifications are done partically on interior volume Interior volume based on cars of the 60s. Phantom coupe is a compact, prius is midsize, ford c-max is a large car.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 04:16
|
|
|
I see a lot of cockbag fuckwits in that video and one poor bastard trucker. Video guy: hey rear end in a top hat, hang up the goddamned phone, don't tailgate Camaro guy: tailgating, has a bulb out, passing in a breakdown lane that is about to end, trying to cut people off Pickup truck guy: keep right except to pass (EVERY state has a law of some sort about this), stop being a passive aggressive douchebag, and don't swerve around like an idiot I've been very tempted to do what the camaro driver did sooooo many times, but never done it. Not worth the risks even if some stupid loving idiot is zoned out in the left lane and no one has the balls to high beam them till they move over. Hopefully the camaro guy and pickup guy got in a fight and killed each other, we need fewer idiots out there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 04:35
|
|
|
I can't be the only person to wonder how a bulb burned out on a new car like that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 04:37
|
|
|
InterceptorV8 posted:I can't be the only person to wonder how a bulb burned out on a new car like that. It's an imperfect world. Sometimes bulbs burn out.
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 04:43
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:32 |
|
|
Also: GM
|
|
#
?
Apr 27, 2015 04:52
|
|
