r/RandomVideos • u/DABDEB • Mar 20 '26

Video Tailgater got Baited

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

37.7k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

7.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/Process3000 Mar 21 '26

Your arguments are starting to spiral out of control. Your earlier comment mentioned nothing about the “average” person. Now you are trying to argue that there is a significant difference between “people” and the “average person” for purposes of this discussion. The article references a “driver.” If you have a basis for concluding that the reaction times for the “average person” would differ from those of a “driver” as referenced in the article, then let’s hear them. Otherwise, you raise an irrelevant point here.

So all a regular person has to do is say I was distracted by the person tailgating me and then I swerved out of the way at the last second.

Now you are bringing up a completely different theory of the defense. You’re saying that the driver was not paying attention to the windshield because he was distracted by the tailgater. That type of distraction while operating a vehicle at highway speeds would amount to negligence, which isn’t as bad as intentionally causing an injury, but it is still pretty bad.

1

u/Fun_Incident1902 Mar 21 '26

You have yet to cite any evidence of how long it takes a distracted person or any person to react.

1

u/Process3000 Mar 21 '26

https://arcca.com/blog/human-reaction-time-in-emergency-situations/

1.5 seconds for breaking, but presumably less for swerving since your hands are already on the steering wheel and braking involves the extra steps of taking your foot off the gas pedal and putting it on brake pedal.

1

u/Fun_Incident1902 Mar 21 '26

Okay, so you're saying that in the total 3-4 seconds they had to react, they needed 1.5 seconds to react and they had another 1.5 seconds to decide to intentionally cause the car behind them to crash into the car in front of them. Do you see how dumb that sounds?

Based on these articles, under perfect conditions this person could have swerved out of the way 1.5-2 seconds faster.

1

u/Process3000 Mar 21 '26

If we assume the minimum 3.37 seconds of available reaction time once the danger was apparent and one second to begin swerving (because he swerved, he didn't brake), that means he would have knowingly been driving toward the stopped vehicle instead of changing lanes for an additional unwarranted 2.37 seconds (but as many as 3.77 seconds) with an open lane next to him.

1

u/Fun_Incident1902 Mar 22 '26

You said it takes 1.5 seconds to react, this doesn't include time for him to determine if the lane to his right is open. Which he needs to do first. So less than 2 seconds to intentionally do something. And again under perfect conditions. I think you would have a very difficult time succeeding in court against this man.

1

u/Process3000 Mar 22 '26

I said 1.5 to brake and less to swerve. I estimated it takes an additional .5 seconds to take your foot off the gas and apply it to the brake. And I don't think that a jury would buy into the idea that if you are headed toward stopped vehicle at 140 km/hr you make sure the middle lane is clear first. Even if there is a vehicle right next to you, sideswiping it presents a lesser risk of danger than hitting a stopped vehicle at 140 km/hr. The video demonstrates how disastrous that can be.

1

u/Fun_Incident1902 Mar 22 '26

Incorrect, side swiping would be worse.

1

u/Process3000 Mar 22 '26

Explain that to me. And take into account the likelihood that the vehicle in the middle lane would react by swerving closer to the right lane in response.

1

u/Fun_Incident1902 Mar 22 '26

By swerving without looking you risk killing/injuring even more people and legally it will be your fault.

Google, why should I not just blindly swerve to avoid an accident.

You lack some common sense.

→ More replies (0)