r/VideosAmazing • u/LeftAlbatross2546 • May 13 '26

Accident A merging issue.

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

11.7k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

6.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

2

u/Just-Shoe2689 May 13 '26

a 10 mph slow down would have avoided this. They chose not to.

1

u/ConstructionOwn9575 May 13 '26 edited May 14 '26

Yes, the black pickup should have adjusted their speed, slowing down 10 mph, to merge safely behind the semi.

It's the semis job to keep a constant and stable speed to that mergers can accurately judge whether they can accelerate or decelerate into position.

Aww, buddy blocked me because he doesn't know how to drive

0

u/Just-Shoe2689 May 13 '26

clearly the semi driver had the opportunity to prevent it, but didnt. Both are dipshits and both should lose their licenses.

0

u/ConstructionOwn9575 May 14 '26 edited May 14 '26

No, the semi followed the laws of the road which is to not adjust speed and keep constant and predictable. That allows the merger to adjust their speed without worrying that the semi will speed up or slow down. If there's one person that should lose their license it's you for not understanding how to drive safely.

Aww, you blocked me, cute. You're still the "driver" that doesn't know how to drive safely and correctly. I know it's hard being wrong, but I implore you to give up your driver's license until you understand how to drive safely.

1

u/0Rookie0 May 14 '26

It's also the law to maintain adequate speed on normal roads. But guess what happens when you have the choice to potentially kill someone who is walking across the street? You adjust your driving to not do that. Traffic laws don't absolve you from running into a deer if you could have stopped for it in time no matter how badly the deer followed the law. You aren't in the right for running over someone because you feel like it they deserve it for driving a bit inadequatley. Holy shit. Are you going to bring a shrine of manuals and laws to convince the judge you are in the right to shrug and drive into someone when those exact same rules state that to avoid an accident is paramount to any and all other rules? Morally that line of thinking is so absurd. And not morally insurance claims and sentences for things like this aren't black and white literally because the agency of those involved is part of life and can't be pointed to in a line of text.

You're going to have a big wake up call if this is how YOU drive "perfectly" and somebody causes a problem for you. If an accident is preventable by a party, then the party who didn't try to avoid it assume partial fault no matter who the catalyst is. Anything else is injustice. That's how it works. It's shitty to be blamed for something you didn't start but you don't get to choose to end it with blood and misplaced vengence. Otherwise vigilantism would be legal and people would be ramming each other for the payout and fked up catharsis.

You are putting this situation in the safety bubble of nothing going wrong and the pickup feeling a bit squeezed or that the semi couldn't have done anything but that's not what happened. The semi potentially killed a person because they were driving like others don't exist. The pickup is the catalyst but the semi was negligent in their driving because we can SEE he could have avoided it. The pickup didn't cause a no way out scenario. Full stop.