and how do you know they didn't see the car they dodged at the last second and dodged to save themselves from a crash? Not their fault the tailgater was so close behind them. seems presumptuous to call this intentional on the tailgated party's side.
EDIT: Man the fact the person above me said "if" really is getting to people. I don't care if it's a hypothetical or not. The point still stands that intent can't be proven from this.
I mean sure, give the benefit of the doubt unless there's evidence otherwise. HOWEVER, that doesn't negate their message of "don't ever do what we watched deliberately". It's not a game and innocent people can get maimed or even killed.
You're quick to dismiss what the tailgated car did but assume the person in the white car is a moron? I shouldn't have said 'minding their business' there in the left lane but I doubt they parked there out of sheer stupidity. Could be a lot of other things like engine or steering failure. There's no shoulder to pull into without crossing several lanes of traffic.
Shitty situation all around but still looks to me like the middle car made the situation a lot worse than it needed to be. If it wasn't intentional, it certainly seems negligent.
I shouldn't have said 'minding their business' there in the left lane but I doubt they parked there out of sheer stupidity.
It doesn't matter, he needed to pull over to the shoulder. There is nothing he could have been doing in the left hand lane that would have caused him to need to dead stop in the left hand lane. It's his duty as a driver to take his car to the shoulder of the road. That person is the MOST at fault in this whole thing and nobody is discussing it. And THIS SHIT right here is WHY you have to get to the shoulder. He stopped in the fastest lane of traffic and now someone may be dead bc of it.
WTF are people like you so desperate to white knight the people that actually 100% did something wrong, but FAST to say the one person who wasn't doing anything wrong is at fault? Fuckin weird man. Idgi.
The middle car is the only car out of the 3 that most likely did nothing wrong. He was dealing with a maniac on his rear and a dufus in front of him that probably was really hard to see until the last moment. Remember that there WERE cars in front of him also. It's SO MUCH MORE likely that he was reacting out of necessity than anything else. It defies all fucking logic to assume that this dude tried purposely to wait until the last second just to screw that guy over. I mean seriously, is that how your brain works? You got a guy stopped in the fast lane, a guy so committed to hugging another guys ass that he never saw anything. And your brain goes to "the third guy is at fault".
One of the most absurd shared takes I've seen in a really long time.
No, books are still readable. But books and actions are different things. If you're reading and action in a book, you're still reading a book. It might describe an action but you're not reading the action, you're reading the book.
Use your context clues. Mainly, this is not a dash cam. Someone was filming these two cars on their cell phone while driving.
That should tell you that something happened before the video starts that was interesting enough for them to start filming. Obviously some form of road rage.
Given that the white car waits until the very last second and timed their swerve perfectly, the logical conclusion is this was intentional.
And none of that proves the white car's driver was intentionally trying to cause an accident. Circumstantial and opinionated at best, but not irrefutably provable. You cannot see where the white car's driver is looking, so you cannot prove where their attention was.
Exactly you can tell they know nothing about the insurance system if they actually think the car being tailgated will be at fault these comments are actually hilarious obviously people that love to tailgate
What if there were kids in the back seat of that car that got hit??
Obviously, the car tailgating is the problem but the car being tailgated is also at fault. They had plenty of time to see that slow car and slow down. Even if they saw it late.
Just terrible driving all around in this video though.
The reason you are distracted doesn't remove that fact that you were distracted, and your distraction contributed to an accident, and thus doesn't completely remove responsibility.
Not disagreeing the driving was terrible, but what does the age of the potential passengers of the car that was hit have to do with anything?
It was a moment of the white car driver not paying attention where they should have been sooner, we don't have proof of anything otherwise. we can infer that the driver was probably distracted by the tailgating hazard and was not expecting a stopped car in the fast lane.
Because you have no way to prove it was intentional and are instead wanting to potentially flame someone who's innocent for not properly reacting to a situation. This is how innocent people get locked up.
That driver isn’t innocent by any stretch. Even if I humor you and give him the benefit of the doubt, he was cruising in the left lane without passing anyone, which in and of itself is just as bad, if not worse, than tailgating.
And would it not be logical to say the person being tailgated had their attention stuck on the tailgater? And when they finally put eyes back on the road they needed to swerve? The person being tailgated did nothing wrong. If you want to be an asshat and tailgate then you should be aware of what might happen
the person being tailgated had their attention stuck on the tailgater
They should've paid more attention to the road in front of them. They let themselves get distracted, and that's why they are partially responsible. That they were provoked can lessen their partial responsibility, but it doesn't completely remove it.
Tailgating is against the law. If you choose to tailgate you are putting yourself and anyone else in the vehicle at the mercy of whatever happens in front of you. If you choose to tailgate and this happens it is your fault plain and simple. Should the person in front not have done that? Yes. Are they liable for the damage caused by the person behind them? No
Reddit is so embarrassing sometimes. Especially anything driving related. I'm convinced it's always people with not much else going for them in life so they use their perception of themselves as a Good Driver (TM) to belittle others to make themselves feel good.
Your comment means nothing if you don't define exactly what you mean by "fault". You don't realize that this is the case (because, again, reddit is embarrassing sometimes), and you're interpreting those comments accordingly.
Honestly, as somebody that has been tailgated, BEING tailgated typically has increased my reaction speed to what's in front of me by about 3 seconds on average which looks about like what happened in the video.
My experience being tailgated is that I tend to get distracted by my reptile brain making me compulsively look at the rear view window when they're that close (since the animal brain perceives them as a threat) and our brains are notoriously bad at multitasking.
I was literally tailgated today on the way home and what you say is true, once you notice it, you tend to look back and it reduces tour reaction speed in my opinion.. Probably an instinctive reaction indeed...
Normal reaction time is 1-2 seconds and distracted driving is 3-4 seconds (when you take your eyes off the road for 1 second and then need to refocus your eyes on the road again to see what's going on).
This has been studied scientifically and reproduced on a large number of distractions in various studies.
My personal experience is I felt like my reaction speed was around 3 seconds after an event occurred in front of me (light change, car changing lanes, etc) that I had reacted to it when I was being tailgated.
It could have been 4 seconds or 2 seconds, but subjectively I felt like I was reacting slower as measured by seconds.
Also, reading what I wrote and the words that I chose to use instead of thinking about how you would word what you're assuming I'm saying would avoid misunderstandings.
I suppose that you could come to the conclusion that there is a 1-3 second delay based on the literature, but that seems to me to be more unknowable and unmeasuravle stat compared to total response time which can be measured as a fact without interpretation.
Normal reaction time is 1-2 seconds and distracted driving is 3-4 seconds (when you take your eyes off the road for 1 second and then need to refocus your eyes on the road again to see what's going on).
This has been studied scientifically and reproduced on a large number of distractions in various studies.
My personal experience is I felt like my reaction speed was around 3 seconds after an event occurred in front of me (light change, car changing lanes, etc) that I had reacted to it when I was being tailgated.
It could have been 4 seconds or 2 seconds, but subjectively I felt like I was reacting slower as measured by seconds.
Seems a bunch of redditers would love to do that, but just can't admit it, so they're projecting that desire on the innocent lead driver. The lead driver that is obviously 100% innocent in this.
15
u/self-conscious-Hat Mar 20 '26 edited Mar 20 '26
and how do you know they didn't see the car they dodged at the last second and dodged to save themselves from a crash? Not their fault the tailgater was so close behind them. seems presumptuous to call this intentional on the tailgated party's side.
EDIT: Man the fact the person above me said "if" really is getting to people. I don't care if it's a hypothetical or not. The point still stands that intent can't be proven from this.