Current Events > IYO, who is in the wrong in this car accident?

(+) Yeah! (+)

From the video it looks like the guy started merging when there was no room to merge, and kept doing so even though it was obvious the other driver wasn't letting him in. The courteous thing to do would be to let the guy merge, but the merger was clearly at fault for his improper lane change from the outset.

---

Thompson posted...

The dashcam driver should've slowed down to give room for the merger.

Absolutely. The merger is still at fault, though, because...

ALIEN_WORK2HOP posted...

No idea what country that is, but here you don't just pull over into the left lane. They have the right of way regardless of you setting your blinker or not.

The fact that you called it an accident means no one is wrong or at fault

---

ALIEN_WORK2HOP posted...

No idea what country that is, but here you don't just pull over into the left lane. They have the right of way regardless of you setting your blinker or not.

Reminds me of this gem.



---

R1masher posted...

The fact that you called it an accident means no one is wrong or at fault

That's not true. The vast majority of car accidents don't happen because of intentional collisions.

---

R1masher posted...

The fact that you called it an accident means no one is wrong or at fault

What would you call it then?

---

Unspecified_NPC posted...

Voted both but after listening to sound, dashcam guy laid on his horn and merger continued to merge. 100% merger's fault

---

R1masher posted...

The fact that you called it an accident means no one is wrong or at fault

No, it means that it wasn't intentional. Someone can definitely be at fault for something that is an accident

---

St0rmFury posted...

What would you call it then?

he's either a kid or troll...either way he doesn't know what he's talking about so no point in acknowledging what he said.

kordogmcdohl posted...

he's either a kid or troll...either way he doesn't know what he's talking about so no point in acknowledging what he said.

Or he could be an insurance agent

---

The guy who passes on the right, fails to signal until he starts the merge, and then keeps merging when the other guy doesn't slow down is more at fault. I'm not even sure the driver being passed saw the signal.

---

codey posted...

Driving like that causes issues, though. You know what avoids issues? Keeping situational awareness and safely braking when you notice someone cutting you off.

Situational awareness is also knowing when it is and isn't safe to merge and not just assuming that since your blinker is on, you'll be allowed in.

---

Both, but the merger guy is more fundamentally in the wrong for super obvious reasons, but the dashcam guy knew for a fact the merger guy wasn't getting it and should have swallowed his pride and slowed down, but chose to play chicken instead.

---

MErger made the bigger mistake, started the problem. Dashcam finished the job by speeding up to get them both in trouble lmao

Gurifisu posted...

Situational awareness is also knowing when it is and isn't safe to merge and not just assuming that since your blinker is on, you'll be allowed in.

Ideally both people should have been more aware but instead neither of them were lol

---

eston posted...

Ideally both people should have been more aware but instead neither of them were lol

Yeah, the merger clearly merged a bit early and waited too long to turn on his blinkers, but not THAT bad, easily would have made it through if dashcam slowed down a little.
Dashcam instead honked, which is also fine and should have told the merger "You fucked up, go away", but merger continued instead of retreating...
And then Dashcam sped up and smashed into him, knowing merger was ignoring the honking lmao.
A duel of egos.

---

The dash cam driver knew what the merger was trying to do and was a dick about it. They hit the car in front of them.

---

Merger needs to use his indicators before attempting to get into the new lane.

---

The merger fucked up, but didn't cause the accident.

Had the guy not intentionally sped up when the merger was already partially in the lane there would be no accident. The dashcam footage is damning for this guy because it shows that as little room as there was to switch lanes and as unsafe as the merger was being, he was able to get over until dashcam dude sped up and rammed him.

Like, in what world do you have to live in to see someone speed up and ram someone and say it's the fault of the guy that got rammed just because he cut someone off? Again, this is the equivalent of knocking someone out because they bumped into you.

---

Just because someone doesnt have the right of way doesnt mean you get to speed up and knock them off the road. The guy clearly sped up to keep the other dude from coming over. Any cop who witnessed that would have ticketed them both.

---

The merger is more wrong, but the dashcammer sure aint right.

---

codey posted...

The merger fucked up, but didn't cause the accident.

Had the guy not intentionally sped up when the merger was already partially in the lane there would be no accident. The dashcam footage is damning for this guy because it shows that as little room as there was to switch lanes and as unsafe as the merger was being, he was able to get over until dashcam dude sped up and rammed him.

Like, in what world do you have to live in to see someone speed up and ram someone and say it's the fault of the guy that got rammed just because he cut someone off? Again, this is the equivalent of knocking someone out because they bumped into you.

That's a really shitty analogy. Stop saying stupid fucking things. This is closer to somebody shadowboxing and somebody walking directly in front of them and getting knocked out. Yeah, if I'm punching and kicking some air and I see someone walking within my vicinity, I should probably stop, but I'm by no means obligated to stop no matter how effortless it is.

---

Merger is at 100% fault, but dashcam is a psychopathic asshole for speeding up in trying to prevent the merge. There would have been no accident if dashcam laid off the gas instead.

---

Onus is on the merger to wait for an opening

You don't get to turn on your blinker and just expect jesus to take the wheel

---

Gurifisu posted...

That's a really shitty analogy. Stop saying stupid fucking things. This is closer to somebody shadowboxing and somebody walking directly in front of them and getting knocked out. Yeah, if I'm punching and kicking some air and I see someone walking within my vicinity, I should probably stop, but I'm by no means obligated to stop no matter how effortless it is.

That's not what happened though? Your analogy only works if you see the guy entering your space and intentionally throw a high kick to the back of his head because you don't like that.

This driver didn't keep driving like he was, he saw someone merging and sped up to ram him.

---

Whoever made that shitty, easy-rollover Micro-Machine car
---

CE_gonna_CE posted...

The rammer is more wrong, but the merger sure aint right.

ftfy

Gurifisu posted...

That's a really shitty analogy. Stop saying stupid fucking things. This is closer to somebody shadowboxing and somebody walking directly in front of them and getting knocked out. Yeah, if I'm punching and kicking some air and I see someone walking within my vicinity, I should probably stop, but I'm by no means obligated to stop no matter how effortless it is.

look at this edgelord lol

---

Paragon21XX posted...

Merger is at 100% fault

Some of you guys are in for a rude awakening when the cops show up if you think you can just ram another car because you dont want it to come over. First rule of drivers ed is youre supposed to drive defensively, not offensively. You cant ram a parked car in the Lowes parking lot just because its parked illegally. Right of way doesnt always magically absolve you of all guilt.

---

BeyondWalls posted...

Some of you guys are in for a rude awakening when the cops show up if you think you can just ram another car because you dont want it to come over. First rule of drivers ed is youre supposed to drive defensively, not offensively. You cant ram a parked car in the Lowes parking lot just because its parked illegally. Right of way doesnt always magically absolve you of all guilt.

Implying that merger was driving defensively and not trying to shoehorn into way to small of a space

Ok dude

---

WizardPowers posted...

Implying that merger was driving defensively and not trying to shoehorn into way to small of a space

Ok dude

That's not what he was implying at all.

---

It genuinely frightens me that so many posters think it's entirely normal and appropriate to prove the other guy wrong when in a moving vehicle


---

Check your blind spot, goddamn.

---

WizardPowers posted...

Implying that merger was driving defensively and not trying to shoehorn into way to small of a space

Ok dude

That's not what he's implying though. He's implying that the dashcam driver should have driven defensively.

If this were in California, the merger would definitely be listed as the PCF (primary collision factor) on the police report, but the dashcam driver could easily be listed as an associated collision factor for not slowing down (he had time to, but clearly chose not to). Saying "I have the right of way" does not justify aggressive driving. They're both at fault, for different reasons.

---

dont know what the laws are in china but the merger is 99% wrong. not only did he leave zero space, he was already halfway into the lane before he even turned his blinker on

dashcam is 1% wrong because he shouldnt have accelerated like an idiot just to prove a point, but legally i dont think he is in the wrong. honestly it looked like he wouldve gotten hit even without accelerating, the acceleration just made it worse

---

PatrickMahomes posted...

dont know what the laws are in china but the merger is 99% wrong. not only did he leave zero space, he was already halfway into the lane before he even turned his blinker on

dashcam is 1% wrong because he shouldnt have accelerated like an idiot just to prove a point, but legally i dont think he is in the wrong. honestly it looked like he wouldve gotten hit even without accelerating, the acceleration just made it worse

luckily for all drivers, there is a thing called a brake pedal, which allows you to REDUCE your speed, which was an option available for the rammer/killer

---

PatrickMahomes posted...

dont know what the laws are in china but the merger is 99% wrong. not only did he leave zero space, he was already halfway into the lane before he even turned his blinker on

dashcam is 1% wrong because he shouldnt have accelerated like an idiot just to prove a point, but legally i dont think he is in the wrong. honestly it looked like he wouldve gotten hit even without accelerating, the acceleration just made it worse

yeah i don't think the merger guy even had to merge. It wasn't even like it was forcing him to merge

what ended up happening with this accident tc? you know?

krazychao5 posted...

luckily for all drivers, there is a thing called a brake pedal, which allows you to REDUCE your speed, which was an option available for the rammer/killer

oh dont get me wrong i am in full agreement that the whole thing is avoided if the dashcammer brakes. but on the other hand, like #89 says, there was no required reason to lane change either. it looked like the merger just saw that the left lane was going faster than the right lane and so merger wanted to get over. he tried to speed up to pass motorcyclists instead of letting dashcammer go first because of how little space there was to merge

yes merger is wrong for speeding up to try and block him off, but the merger put himself in a perilous position by assuming the lane was open, when it definitely was not.

again legally merger's fault but dashcammer could have prevented the whole thing. nothing legally wrong with accelerating in your lane.

---

Huh, I was also about 50/50 until someone pointed out it had sound and I heard the horn.

Dashcam guy could still have prevented the accident but merger guy fucked up.

Judgment: Merger 80%, Dashcam 20%

---

codey posted...

That's not what happened though? Your analogy only works if you see the guy entering your space and intentionally throw a high kick to the back of his head because you don't like that.

This driver didn't keep driving like he was, he saw someone merging and sped up to ram him.

As I said it's closer to the scenario than decking somebody for bumping into you as the other driver was given adequate warning. Driver was honking for a solid while as he sped up.

Merger saw there was a car in the lane he wanted to merge into and if he hadn't seen the driver refuse to yield, he should have at the very least heard it. Again, I agree driver should have yielded, but he really didn't have to. Merger was given plenty of warnings and continued to do so anyways.

If you try to do something and somebody makes it known they won't let you, and you proceed anyway, you're the one that made a larger impact on the situation. Regardless of whether the response/ consequence is too extreme or irrational, you were given an explicit warning. You should never assume anything when on the road.

---

Both parties behaved like idiots and had multiple chances to prevent the accident. Its true that the merger started the incident but speeding up was the dumbest response to that.

---

From a pure legal standpoint, the merger is 100% wrong because you should never force a merge.

From a more practical standpoint, the dash cammer shares part of the blame because he aggressively responded and made a bad situation much worse. He had time to hit the horn so he clearly had time to hit his breaks and avoid a pissing contest. Instead he didnt want his precious ego harmed by someone getting in front of him and causing him to reach his destination 2 seconds later. I give him 30% blame.

It is everyones responsibility to keep the roads safe and sometimes that means driving defensively even when youre in the right.

---

I watched this video again. Merger is still at MAJOR fault here. When he heads the horn, he started to stop changing Kanes then changed his mind? Fuck that guy. If I was dashcam guy, I would have slowed down but I can see how he assumed that the guy wasnt going to go over. Also, we dont know what else he saw. If I was that guy, I laid on the horn, the guy looked like he wasnt going to go over and there was a guy behind me that was uncomfortably close, I might have panicked a little and sped up to avoid the car running into me from behind.

We just dont know what dashcam guy saw. We do know that the merger completely fucked up no matter how you slice it so they are at fault

---

Surprisingly I'm putting this on the white van. While Dashcam is in the wrong, we don't know what is going on behind him. With the way traffic looked in this video we can assume it was like that behind them as well, so slowing down might not have been an option without getting rear ended.

CalypsoDoom posted...

This. I don't give a shit about being right, I care about not totaling my car and causing bodily harm to myself or others.

I dont think posters think that what dashcam guy did was correct. Most of us agree he shares blame in this. However, the merger was more at fault. That is what we are saying. It isnt one way or the other. They can both be at fault

---