Highway Driving

[tboy]

If you hit me from the rear, it's your fault. That's really all there is to it. Doesn't matter what the car in front of you is doing - you need to drive appropriately.

Wrong, that was the way it was in the past, now they take into consideration the entire scenario. For eg: if you slam on your brakes for no apparent reason and cause an accident, you will be held at least partially at fault, if not totally at fault. I know I know we have a "no fault" system in Ontario but believe me, the police will lay charges to the person who caused the accident and simply following too close is not the reason the accident would occur.

Same as if you change lanes and cut someone off and then slam on your brakes causing them to hit you you will again be found at fault.

See, you can't just do whatever you want just because you're in front, that's the idea that many have and they will be sourly mistaken if they cause an accident by their actions.

 

[S.C. Joe]

I slam in to the back of your car, you spin out and start flipping the car over and over. Its my fault, I be in jail while you are likely dead or maybe we both be...those type of accidents happen before and will happen again.

 

[tboy]

I slam in to the back of your car, you spin out and start flipping the car over and over. Its my fault, I be in jail while you are likely dead or maybe we both be...those type of accidents happen before and will happen again.

Don't get me wrong, if the car in front has a legimate reason for braking suddenly then yes, the driver in the rear would be at fault. But we're not talking about having a deer or a kid or a car dash in front of them, they're hitting the brakes just for the "hell of it" or "to teach the guy behind a lesson".

There's a cop in my building, I think I'll bother him with this scenario and see what his take is on it (whether someone would be charged or not)....

 

[King Elessar]

Wrong, that was the way it was in the past, now they take into consideration the entire scenario. For eg: if you slam on your brakes for no apparent reason and cause an accident, you will be held at least partially at fault, if not totally at fault. I know I know we have a "no fault" system in Ontario but believe me, the police will lay charges to the person who caused the accident and simply following too close is not the reason the accident would occur.

Same as if you change lanes and cut someone off and then slam on your brakes causing them to hit you you will again be found at fault.

See, you can't just do whatever you want just because you're in front, that's the idea that many have and they will be sourly mistaken if they cause an accident by their actions.

Unless I wilfully cause an accident to the car behind me, I'm not at fault for being struck from behind.
It's the way it was and the way it is.

 

[tboy]

Unless I wilfully cause an accident to the car behind me, I'm not at fault for being struck from behind.
It's the way it was and the way it is.

Sorry, purposely applying your brakes and causing an accident just to "teach someone a lesson" IS wilfully causing an accident.......and you WILL be found at fault......that's the way it is.......

Actually, you don't even have to cause an accident to be charged (and found guilty) of an offence. Simply the act of hitting your brakes for no apparent reason is sufficient to bring about a possible reckless driving charge.

 

[S.C. Joe]

Its very hard to prove people brake for no good reason.


When I was a young punk I took off fast from the light and squeal my tires--I waited a few seconds for traffic to get a head start. Well back then I just drove with my right foot, like they claim you are to drive, some old man slammed on his brakes and I rear ended his car. I was pissed off so we called the cops. The old man tells the cops he hear a loud squealing noise and was thought it was his car making the noise like his wheel froze up and decided its best to stop. The cop wrote the accident up as my fault, lol.

True story....now my left foot is right on top of the brake pedal 99% of the time.

 

[tboy]

Its very hard to prove people brake for no good reason.


When I was a young punk I took off fast from the light and squeal my tires--I waited a few seconds for traffic to get a head start. Well back then I just drove with my right foot, like they claim you are to drive, some old man slammed on his brakes and I rear ended his car. I was pissed off so we called the cops. The old man tells the cops he hear a loud squealing noise and was thought it was his car making the noise like his wheel froze up and decided its best to stop. The cop wrote the accident up as my fault, lol.

True story....now my left foot is right on top of the brake pedal 99% of the time.

Wow, you must go through a lot of brake pads lol.

Yes, it is hard to prove that someone slammed on their brakes for no reason but it isn't impossible.

For eg: eyewitness by the ticketing officer. The cop sees someone following too close. He is maneuvering through the lanes to get behind the two vehicles to flash his lights and pull the rear vehicle over. As he's doing this he sees the front vehicle slam on his brakes.

Another way is for the cop to interview each party separately. With the increase incidence of road rage, this act is becoming more and more common.

For eg: While interviewing the driver of the front vehicle, he discovers or hears in the driver's voice that he was pissed off at the guy for driving too close, that it was irritating him, and the cop would ask: then why didn't you just move over? If he hears anything like: why should I? then you can expect a charge to be forthcoming...and believe me, people incriminate themselves ALL the time.....

 

[S.C. Joe]

True, back then there was no such thing as road rage--there was but now of days cops do look for it.

What the GTA has is way too many cars and not enough lanes of traffic, so in a way its hard to keep out of everybody way if you drive 110-115. I try to keep my speed 115 tops in the GTA, I can't easy come back up to fight a ticket and I don't know the highways like I do around my town. 3 lanes of traffic isn't enough, really needs to be 5 like in Los Angles.

 

[King Elessar]

Sorry, purposely applying your brakes and causing an accident just to "teach someone a lesson" IS wilfully causing an accident.......and you WILL be found at fault......that's the way it is.......

Right. I agree. Unless I WILFULLY cause an accident. That's what I was saying.
Any other reason for my braking?
You're at fault if you hit me from behind.
And, of course, nobody EVER hits the brakes at highway speeds for any other reason than to piss off a tailgater.

Actually, you don't even have to cause an accident to be charged (and found guilty) of an offence. Simply the act of hitting your brakes for no apparent reason is sufficient to bring about a possible reckless driving charge.

Sure, and the same thing applies to tailgating.
Which is why SC was at fault, rationally, morally and legally, in the situation he described.

 

[mmouse]

tboy, just get the fucking message already. Don't tailgate.

 

[Moraff]

tboy, just get the fucking message already. Don't tailgate.

Unless I missed something I don't think tboy is advocating tailgating as a useful thing. We're discussing whether or not it's a good idea to stay in front of a tailgater any longer than necessary and what legal ramifications may result in "teaching them a lesson".

 

[tboy]

tboy, just get the fucking message already. Don't tailgate.

Funny, how some wingnuts jump into a conversation that has been going on for a week and they have no clue what's going on?

mmouse: get the fucking message, go back and read this thread before making any undue comments....DOH

 

[tboy]

Hey, heard back from my cop neighbour. He said the vehicle in front could be charged with failure to yield and as sc joe suggested, it would be hard to prove.

 

[mmouse]

Unless I missed something I don't think tboy is advocating tailgating as a useful thing.

Agreed, he just has the retarded idea that it's not a dangerous thing to do.

the guy tailgating you is not specifically doing anything that could cause an accident.

Probably the stupidiest thing I've ever read on terb.

 

[tboy]

Agreed, he just has the retarded idea that it's not a dangerous thing to do.

Show me anywhere in this thread that I said any such thing?

the guy tailgating you is not specifically doing anything that could cause an accident.

Probably the stupidiest thing I've ever read on terb.

Go back to school and take up reading comp 101.....you obviously need it...oh yeah, take physics too, you might then be able understand the concept ........

 

[the_big_E]

This is one of the reasons I hate driving in the left lane on the 407...drivers are a couple of feet from another, virtually no distance between the cars. Yet, I've never witnessed an accident when it seems as though one car touching the brakes could cause a nice 7 car pile up.

 

[S.C. Joe]

Many drivers at some time follow the car in front too close, many. Just some do it more often and at higher speeds.

Way back 30 years ago at drivers ed, we were told to keep 1 car length back for each 10 mph. So at 100 km/h you should be back 6 car lengths. You can't do that cause other drivers will always pull in between.

But when like on a 2 lane road wheres theres a head on collision, the car in front just stops dead, maybe even gets pushed back a bit-why they are so deadly. You can not brake that fast. Its how chain reaction crashes happen. You can not come to a dead stop unless you hit a tree, a car going the other way, even another car already stop--thats how on the freeway most chain accidents happen.

Driving can be "fun" but its not a game. You can get hurt very bad--and not be at fault. Many people get whiplash by getting rear ended. If you never had back problems, great. But even standing up you use your back. Just 1 accident getting hit from behind, your back might never be strong again. Don't play around while driving is what T-boy is saying I believe.

 

[tboy]

THanks joe, that's exactly what I'm saying (for the people who insist on hammering their brakes to "teach anyone a lesson").

You're correct, often people think you're driving too close (in their opinion) when there simply isn't enough room.

I also like the people who leave 3 car lengths for every 10 kph. I say to them: if everyone kept that spacing you'd be in Kansas NOT Toronto lol....

To clarify about my statement (simply driving too close doesn't specifically cause an accident) isn't to say that a rear end accident could result from following too close but an external influence would be required for that to happen. For eg: when you're driving in your lane, cars are much closer beside you than any vehicle in front of or behind you. That specifically doesn't cause an accident either until an external influence is put into play.

So yeah, it's always safer to not drive directly beside someone, follow too close to someone and it is downright dangerous to hammer your brakes if someone IS following too close. I mean really, if someone is driving beside you do you swerve into their lane to get them to move?

 

[Egor]

The logic as so many of you fail to realize is that two objects travelling in the same direction at the same speed will NEVER contact one another unless an outside influence is applied. In this case an idiot slamming on their brakes for no reason.....

This is getting tiresome. And what happens if the car in front has a "good reason" to brake hard? Are you sure you've left enough space for you to brake hard too, without ramming into them? With thousands of drivers on the road, passing, merging, ramping on and off the freeway, there are "outside influences" happening continously.

These people who constantly tailgate make me laugh. I notice that even when I do get out of the way to let them pass, it's usually only a matter of seconds before they are on the ass of the next car ahead of me. That's when I know that it isn't me driving dangerously, it's them.

 

[tboy]

This is getting tiresome. And what happens if the car in front has a "good reason" to brake hard? Are you sure you've left enough space for you to brake hard too, without ramming into them? With thousands of drivers on the road, passing, merging, ramping on and off the freeway, there are "outside influences" happening continously.

These people who constantly tailgate make me laugh. I notice that even when I do get out of the way to let them pass, it's usually only a matter of seconds before they are on the ass of the next car ahead of me. That's when I know that it isn't me driving dangerously, it's them.

That's true, but that doesn't negate the fact that in and of itself, 2 vehicles travelling close together doesn't necessarily cause an accident. The distance between the two is a precaution that should be taken to increase reaction time in case of outside influences.

My point is people slam on their brakes to "teach someone a lesson" and to "get them to back off" which in and of itself is the root cause of the accident (if one occurs). This is unnecessary and foolish to say the least.

Again, my point is: if someone is following too close then move over and let them by, DON'T do anything stupid like try to slow them down. If you can't move over then either ignore them or speed up to increase the distance between you and move over when it's safe to do so.