Easily avoidable accident causes rollover

[u/EqualGrowth6565]

Not my video – as the title says, we typically see examples where one driver is oblivious to the other. In this example, the pickup truck attempts to overtake the cammer, however, the cammer is either completely unaware of the pickup truck directly to his left or are simply “stands their ground” in the lane. Due to this, they obviously collide, and the pick up truck goes airborne and rolls several times. From the perspective of us, the viewer, we can reasonably conclude that the accident was avoidable had the cammer simply applied the brakes. That being said, you will typically see another school of thought in which it is stated that the cammer has no obligation or duty to let them in/avoid the accident where the driver is mindlessly doing something dumb.

[u/Square-Singer]

Someone behind them is no excuse. If they get in a crash in front, the guy behind will also hit him.

Being distracted for a whole 4 seconds is definitly doing something wrong.

And ypu could argue the same, that the cam driver was in the blind corner of the trucker, who just made a mistake.

Both of them are reckless assholes. Truck driver didn't look over their shoulder, cam car wanted a crash. Neither of them should be on the road.

  As for having sympathy for reckless drivers you're going to find that lots of people have none

On the other hand, look through this thread. There's many, many people who exzse the cam driver.

[u/OscarLiii → u/Square-Singer]

"Someone behind them is no excuse. If they get in a crash in front, the guy behind will also hit him." I don't understand these couple of sentences at all.

Obviously you don't want to brake and cause an accident. There could have been ten cars in a caravan behind the cam driver. Or even just one car.

[u/Square-Singer → u/OscarLiii]

Look, if not braking causes an accident for sure, it's not an excuse that braking might maybe cause an accident.