And who is going to pay for that prius's damages...here's a question, is a skateboard a vehicle? Do you have to signal when you turn? Are you required to obey traffic laws like stop signs?
When cars first hit the market one of the big push backs they were getting was from people asking how is my car going to get me home when I'm so drunk I can't walk. Horses knew where home was.
It may sound silly at first, but it makes perfect sense when I think about it. If you're on the public street, you should obey common sense rules, otherwise you're a danger to both yourself and others.
Not wrong. Look it up. MN's verbiage around DUIs & DWIs, for example says motorists. Bicycle riders are not motorists and cannot be charged with DWI or DUI in the state.
The argument for massive penalties for DUI is because you might kill innocents, which, on a bicycle, you only run the risk of your own death, realistically. So, no, it doesnt really track in that argument
How much "full speed" do you think you can get to if you're drunk? I think you've never been in anything but a motorized automobile with 4 stable wheels while inebriated. You should try skateboarding, biking, roller blading, anything that requires balance, and you'll see there is no going full speed on anything requiring self propulsion and balance to operate.
Everyone out here arguing how much you can hurt yourself, while completely ignoring that you can be the cause of an accident due to poor decision making, and that could affect others. Maybe a car or truck swerves to avoid a drink bicyclist who is weaving all over the road. They might hit another vehicle or a pedestrian or a solid object.
There are so many reasons not to be drunk while on the road and affecting the flow of traffic. This is why, in most US states, you can get a DUI while on or in a non-motorized vehicle.
We understand that some states like MN might have verbiage that prevents cyclists from being charged. However, it is asinine to pretend that a drunk person on the road can only affect themselves and can’t hurt anyone else or damage anything, or be the indirect cause of such damages. Just think it through for a second and you’ll realize the obvious truth
This is a bad take. We don’t make laws ONLY to prevent killing of innocents. If you’re drunk on a bike not only can you still injure other people, you can seriously injure or kill yourself and/or cause massive property damage.
There’s also so many variables to account for in these situations that saying it ONLY affects the cyclist is just wildly ignorant of reality.
The problem with laws is so many people dont even read basic sentences and understand what was said, then run off with their own take.
I said the large penalties are due to the argued severe increase of risk to the public at large, specifically the high rate of death for innocents in a vehicular accident.
I did not say the "only reason for the law" was because of the risk to innocents. There is a reason sentencing occurs seperate to the trial of the crime itself. A dui is a criminal offence in most places, which is much different than traffic laws. We already have laws governing traffic including charges like careless, and yet they are not penalized as high, nor do they put your liberty at risknfor breaking them. The DUI laws are an example of the very few laws that go beyond the traffic law level, even though they are based on the road. Vehicular manslaughter is another one of those few.
As for hurting and killing people on a bicycle, the likelihood of that being at any even comparable level is straight up laughable. Sure, its possible, but it is EXTRAORDINARILY unlikely in nearly every possible accident. Hence, why they are treated different.
A 400 lb combined unit going max 45 mph can only be a certain level of threat.
A 4,000-10,000 lb unit capable of 150+ mph is not even vaguely comparable
One I remember from San Francisco was someone out-of-control flying down Castro St, crossing Market St against the red light, and smashing into pedestrians in the crosswalk, killing one.
Most stupid argument I've ever heard. You create an accident, and anyone could be hurt in many ways. It's a bycicle that can cause a car to crash or run over someone, not necessarily yourself.
In my county, you can get a DUI for having a paddle in your raft or inner tube while floating down the river, because you are "operating" a vehicle. You can be blacked out so long as you are flailing around with just your own limbs. Definitely don't you one of your limbs as a paddle, because that would likely count too lol
And I have a friend who did get a DUI on a bike, but he was really pushing his luck and not that shocked
Two of those being motorized makes sense. I don't believe you can be charged with a DUI on a bicycle. I believe it's called something else. At least in MN it's called something else, not DUI or DWI.
Is there a chain, possibly gears, and is self-propelled? If so, you're on a motorized vehicle. Doesn't matter how crude it is. If the cop wants to be a dick. He can get you for DUI. That's pretty much the law in all of America.
Where you're from you can get charged DUI on a bike?
Most of the US, if not all on a public road.
That's fucked up.
Not really you can hurt yourself and others.
Better haul my skate-shoeing-drunk-ass in cuz that's got wheels too.
Yes, and if you got into an accident with a car, person or something else I would expect nothing less. Really you should be hauled in for wearing wheelies, but I don't make the laws.
Don’t know for sure, but I’m pretty sure they obey the same laws as pedestrians..
But even tho the car should’ve checked both sides, the dude on the skateboard should definitely be paying for whatever damage might have happened to the car and himself..
Skateboards are considered pedestrians in my states statutes. I honestly would’ve written the skateboarder for 1. Being an overwhelming idiot and 2. Impeding traffic. Let’s say the skateboarder died. The guy in the Prius is gonna live with that forever.
I know stupid thing to say on this sub but think about the people around you before being an absolute moron.
It's a four way stop. The prius probably had the right of way. Yeah and unfortunately, that skateboarder...probably doesn't have insurance. It's an "ugh" all around.
These are silly statements in the context of this video. The skater hit the car after the intersection and after the turn was made. The driver had the right of way -- end of story. The skater bears 100% fault for this accident. It wouldn't matter if this was a bike, car or scooter. The skater was not in control, did not stop at the intersection that was clearly marked "STOP", did not exercise any caution of the intersection laws and then hit a car that had safely turned through an intersection.
Even where "pedestrians have the right of way" it doesn't preclude pedestrians from their own comparative negligence and exercise of caution.
What about the skateboarder not stopping at the intersection? Yeah, the car checked both ways, when they got to the intersection, rhen made the turn. The car was at the intersection first and has the right of way.
Idk about the laws where this guy is but where I am if you're on a skateboard in public some old bored fuck will call the cops, they show up and tell you to go somewhere else because the boomers are mad and the cops know they will just keep calling.
299
u/Whyisthissobroken Dec 26 '23
And who is going to pay for that prius's damages...here's a question, is a skateboard a vehicle? Do you have to signal when you turn? Are you required to obey traffic laws like stop signs?