[USA] Let's just change lanes without looking...
Posted Mar 2, 2016, 4:12 PM UTC
9946
Flying past a line of stopped cars like that is just asking for it.
15
thats victim blaming
1†
No it isn't, it's an accurate assessment of the situation. Creating an unnecessary speed differential like that is hazardous. Would you drive 30mph through a parking lot full of cars?
4
Oh 405... I hate you
11
We all hate 405. But hey cheer up, maybe you can take the light rail...when it gets built...in 2020...maybe.
7
I'll move by then. They opened the street car in Seattle the week I moved back to the East side.
5
Trump will cancel it and build the TrumpRail, but that will go bankrupt so he doesnt have to pay the builders.
0
I'm going to have to go with your fault on this one OP
4
Upvoting for ween..
2
I cannot stand that section of road - both directions are just terribly packed at seemingly random times of the day on top of the more regular rush hour traffic.
Not to mention the huge number of merges that the collapsing lanes cause - 4+ lanes down to 2, how do you think it's going to happen?
2
From the way the car was angled, the other driver seemed to be merging from 2 lanes over as well.
1
[deleted]
-6
It's more the fact that they couldn't possibly see what they were merging ahead of given their decision to move across 2 lanes rather than into one lane, check and move again. Their mirrors would likely have been useless and the angle for a shoulder check wouldn't have helped much. This is why you don't move 2 lanes at once, even in traffic and regardless of whether you don't " cut someone off at full speed".
4
[deleted]
0
They had plenty of time to move over from the looks of things, they didn't end up in that lane and need to get off in the space it took them to make that move.
less sense than slowly inching into the next lane and hoping that some jackass isn't driving too fast.
Well that's the first problem, who knows what's in that lane? That's why you don't just randomly pull out and hope for the best at all junctions right? If it was a semi doing even a reasonable speed there is a chance of collision. They should have merged one lane over a while back and then moved over.
2
[deleted]
1
I know that exact spot, absolute shit show.
1
I'd consider that borderline reckless driving by the cammer. That speed differential is huge. Good avoidance though.
And I don't know why that c-class had to pull out at such a wide angle. That's just asking for it.
1†
In PA you could be cited for that accident, given points on your license and hit with a nasty insurance surcharge... Speed limits are the maximum you're allowed to drive conditions permitting, but if you're "driving too fast for road conditions" then you're at fault for the accident. The person pulling out could argue they checked their mirror, but since you were driving too fast for conditions you came up faster than anticipated...
Just sharing this so others know to understand the laws where they are. Driving too fast for the conditions doesn't only mean driving too fast in snow or rain (at least in PA).
§ 3361. Driving vehicle at safe speed. No person shall drive a vehicle at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions and having regard to the actual and potential hazards then existing, nor at a speed greater than will permit the driver to bring his vehicle to a stop within the assured clear distance ahead. Consistent with the foregoing, every person shall drive at a safe and appropriate speed when approaching and crossing an intersection or railroad grade crossing, when approaching and going around a curve, when approaching a hill crest, when traveling upon any narrow or winding roadway and when special hazards exist with respect to pedestrians or other traffic or by reason of weather or highway conditions.
http://www.licenserestoration.com/driving-vehicle-at-safe-speed-too-fast-for-conditions-75-3361
0†
You aren't wrong. There was a huge speed difference there.
2
Cammer is a fucking idiot. If there was contact and he gave this video to insurance he would have been mostly at fault. He is not driving only too fast for the conditions, he's racing his car through heavy traffic like an oblivious fucktwat. If that was my wife with kids pulling into that lane and I found out who the cammer was I'd curb fuck his skull.
-2
k
1
Let's = Let is
Edit: I stand corrected.
Let us: let’s meet for a drink sometime
-19
I probably should've been driving more defensively and not driving as fast. But c'mon, at least give a second to look in your mirrors before changing lanes...
I'm going into the next exit to I-5 N (on an exit-only lane) from the entrance that I merged on. The slow traffic in the left lanes is because there is heavy traffic going to I-5 S. People also seem to wait until the last minute to merge back from the exit-only lane to the main left lanes.
inb4 cammer is an ass for driving so fast.
While your driving behaviour was perfectly legal, you should know that statistically speaking, the probability of someone going out without looking in their mirror increases exponentially with the amount of cars that are in a traffic jam next to a free lane.
linearly I think.
he meant the exponent is 1
I would add that it can be really hard to see somebody when they're coming up this fast.
The driver of the car changing lanes needs to look in the right-side (convex) mirror before initiating the lane change, when the oncoming driver is still a long way back. During the lane change, the oncoming driver is essentially in the blind spot of the lane changer. If the oncoming driver is coming fast, the lane changer has very little opportunity to see them, yet would still be considered at fault, in most cases, I believe.
I hate the fact that the right-hand mirrors are convex, but that's a different story.
My comments gets voted down, but depending on the laws where it happens if the lane changer can prove that the cammer was coming up fast they won't be considered at fault. As the cammer was driving too fast for conditions...
I agree, and I think that the cammer would be unwise to introduce this video into his defense.
Probability can't "increase exponentially" because probabilities are bounded above by 1, whereas increasing exponential functions are unbounded. Just saying.
If we're being pedantic, growth rate is a local condition, so the global bounds on a function have no bearing on instantaneous and even local growth. Moreover, the domain in this case is bounded too, so there's no reason the growth can't be exponential everywhere. Just saying. ;)
I would just condense that into "not driving as fast". That speed delta was enormous, and there's a large chance that could have ended in injury.
I piss people off when doing this, but I keep my speed delta at less than 20mph around stopped traffic. I've been in your situation countless times and I just got sick of constantly having heart attacks when someone lets cross traffic through, or a pedestrian crosses without looking, or there's an obstruction in the road. One time I almost killed a family of ducklings by passing too quickly. Moral is, it's not speed that kills, it's the sudden stop that does it.
People talk about speed delta all the time and cammer is made to look like a fool, but it's still the responsibility of the car changing lanes to look. If speed delta were an issue they wouldn't have designed HOV lanes, in which there's often a speed delta of 50+ between the HOV traffic and standstill traffic on the non-HOV lanes. I often see people in HOV lanes driving 50mph when the speed limit is 65, simply because the non-HOV lanes are at a standstill, and they are trying to be "careful". That just pisses a lot of people off. If you can't drive at least the speed limit on the HOV lane, then move into the slower lanes.
You can go fast but you just have to watch out for people like that and be prepared to swerve into the shoulder (just like cammer did). There was no collision so it's all good.
Let me ask you this, would you prefer to be in an accident that you were not at fault for, or would you prefer to drive slightly more defensively and avoid an accident altogether?
yes.
I am honestly surprised you haven't gotten downvoted to hell for asking this. I've gotten into drawn-out arguments in this sub with people who insist on exercising their legal right of way at any cost to their property or lives. Every thread is a "you're suggesting the cammer should drive more defensively? THAT MEANS YOU THINK HE'S TO BLAME! STOP BLAMING THE CAMMER!" circlejerk.
I've also seen a driver pop over into the HOV lane and cause a 70-mph rear-end accident that killed the driver of the impacting vehicle and severely injured the family of four in the sedan that cut them off. If you get pissed about someone driving defensively, think about that.
Cammer luckily had some room on the shoulder to work with. I guarantee you he had no room to brake if he didn't.
You were going faster than I would have in that situation.
Part of defensive driving is anticipating the other guy to be an idiot. Zooming through there is just giving yourself less time to react to an idiot.
It's harder to see who is coming down the lane when you're driving that fast in the rain and in heavy traffic.
Look at how far left that car is... I'm fairly certain that had he/she looked in the mirror they would have seen nothing but grill. Either way, should have been a hell of a lot more cautious about pulling into a lane when you can't see what's coming.
[deleted]