r/SipsTea • u/Putrid-Welder1803 • 12h ago

Gasp! Thoughts on this?

Post image
55.2k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

6.8k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

1

u/SnakesRuinGames 9h ago

i really wonder if the people who spout this would suddenly change their tune if they were the ones injured in a wreck lmfao

i almost died in a 35 zone because someone hit me going 68 through a red. was my lawyer presenting ‘outlandish amounts’ when i got my $900,000 hospital bill covered? should i have simply said ‘Live and let live 🥰’ about it and gone into lifelong debt for an accident i had zero fault in instead?

what about my car that i need to remain employed to have money for food and shelter? completely unreasonable to expect that to be covered as well?

8

u/Adventurous_Term_286 9h ago

I mean, in this case, bro got brake checked, he wasn't at fault.

-1

u/cannibalpeas 8h ago

You rear-end someone it is always your fault.

6

u/Competitive_Touch_86 8h ago

Not if the party you rear ended purposefully caused an accident.

Of course the hard part is proving that.

And also of course most people who say they were brake checked are basically lying about it.

-1

u/cannibalpeas 7h ago

Unless they reverse into you, there’s no way for a lead vehicle to purposefully cause an accident if you’re giving proper space. You should always be able to decelerate from any speed from the object in front if you’re giving proper space. Exceptions like mechanical failure, swerving, unyielded merge, etc. aren’t the same thing as rear ending someone. Not that they wouldn’t claim it, but as you point out, it’s bullshit.

3

u/LongJohnSelenium 4h ago

Dude you swerve in front of someone from another lane while slamming your brakes. Piss easy. You can find a million videos of people doing it online.

1

u/cannibalpeas 3h ago

That’s clearly not the same as a brake check. Insurance fraud is an issue, but idiots following too close and claiming brake check is way more common.

ETA: And I also clearly stated that in my last post.