[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

Second video 58 seconds, contact with the vehicle.

I don't see any affirmative contact in that video. The Accord was approximately a foot or two away from the truck. At 0:35 seconds in the first video you can clearly see that no contact occurred. Help me understand why there's still this overwhelming urge to make excuses for the driver of the Accord.

I'll say it again….

…the driver of the truck was not involved in a traffic collision, thus, he was not required by law to remain on scene. That was a solo vehicle, personal property damage only, traffic collision.

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

We absolutely do, because there is context when we discuss the genesis of an OIS incident. Just because the individual was found to be unarmed doesn't mean they didn't present themselves to be armed (…or we didn't receive reports that the individual was armed). Don't let media spin or the color of their skin direct you away from the core reason(s) behind the incident. The media loves to use race to fuel a narrative. People are like bees to honey any time race comes into play.

You have to understand that officers don't just miraculously "show up" and end up in an OIS. It all [usually] begins with a call to dispatch by the informant or other named party reporting a crime. The dispatcher/call taker asks all of the relevant questions, one of them being "Does the individual have any weapons or were any weapons seen?" The answer to that question dictates the type of officer response. From there we investigate prior criminal history, give the commands on scene, etc. etc. and it's at that point the suspect/subject begins to dictate what ultimately happens. When was the last time somebody totally innocent and without a criminal record got shot by police (..the accidental shootings like what occurred in L.A. a couple of months ago notwithstanding)?!? It RARELY happens. The people we [unfortunately] end up shooting aren't your regular Jane or Joe Schmoe.

Oh, for sure and my question was rhetorical. Definitely need all the facts esp when lives/one's liberty are at stake but I'm referring to obvious cases such as George Floyd where there was finally some justice and bad cops like Chauvin are behind bars. The pattern is curiously similar here from detractors bending over backwards excusing the Accord w/o any real justification.

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

You're still on this huh? I still stand by my statement. One person was putting peoples lives in danger. The truck didn't need to get involved making two people now putting peoples lives in danger. He is also the one using other people to attempt to stop the Accord from passing and that in my eyes caused the most danger. Not only that he leaves the scene. You can stop with the theatrics. The fact is it's scary you seem to think the truck didn't do anything really wrong because you keep bringing this up.

Sigh, where did I say only the Accord was the culprit? Where??? Bet your life.
Again, I stated many times truck was bad but Accord was definitely worse - you simply wish to misconstrue everything; the law according to Sedan is CLEAR, so everyone thinking that the truck was worse is DEAD WRONG, yet you guys still stubbornly argue w ego refusing to acknowledge the law. Also, unless you practise proper lane etiquette and only stay right unless passing, you have no right to talk to me because you guys are doing it wrong and drive all over the place.

You also failed to realize that it was a one-car accident!

So, yes, it *is* scary you guys are doubling-down on such a simple case, forget about really complicated stuff like geopolitics.

[thormessiah]

I too speed up when a tail gater attempts to cut me off. I’m usually going over the speed limit, so I really don’t see a reason for them to be in front of me.

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

I don't see any affirmative contact in that video. The Accord was approximately a foot or two away from the truck.

A foot or two?

View post on imgur.com

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

A foot or two?

View post on imgur.com

At 0:34 in the first video there is still space between the two vehicles. It's close, but there was no affirmative contact. The first video is pretty clear. You post some low quality clip and presume it's going to somehow help your argument?!?

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

There was no affirmative contact. The first video is pretty clear. You post some low quality clip and presume it's going to somehow help your argument?!?

You are blind as a bat man

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

You are blind as a bat man

Ok, whatever dude. The truck driver is all bad. He's the worst offender and this is all his fault. Shame on him!

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by tranquility

the law according to Sedan is CLEAR, so everyone thinking that the truck was worse is DEAD WRONG

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

Just so you know this took place in NJ and NJ determines fault of accidents differently than California.

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

This is true. Things vary from state to state and my perspective is based on California law. I believe most understand that however.

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

Yeah, I don't think that's happening.

Still don't think it's happening

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

Still don't think it's happening

Get help man. Like I said, it's a SIMPLE case yet you got it all wrong. I don't wanna hear your opinions on politics, Covid, religion, etc.

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Ok, whatever dude. The truck driver is all bad. He's the worst offender and this is all his fault. Shame on him!

Everything I've said to you simply stated the truck had blame in this. You seem to be making him blameless. That is a fact. Him being the more dangerous of the two is my opinion.

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by tranquility

Get help man. Like I said, it's a SIMPLE case yet you got it all wrong. I don't wanna hear your opinions on politics, Covid, religion, etc.

Err, my conversations have been only about this incident. You can take that shit somewhere else

[Sedan_Clan]

I think this thread has effectively run its course and come to its (un)natural conclusion.

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

Err, my conversations have been only about this incident. You can take that shit somewhere else

That's my pt, you're so cocksure about this simple one yet still got it wrong, you're not qualified to talk about anything that is even a smidge more complex as it definitely won't be anything logical, yet I'm sure you're gonna blabber more nonsense.

Who tailgated, drove on the shoulder, almost sideswipes the truck and swerved in front of an innocent vehicle almost hitting them too besides spraying debris all over the place crashing into the mtn?? Ya, 'truck more reckless than Accord' smh /S. Jezuz, like talking to a wall.

[zx10guy]

Sedan_Clan

Maybe this question is better suited in your questions thread. But since the topic of the truck not stopping has come up repeatedly here. What about this situation where there's no contact between two parties yet one crashes as a direct result of the actions of the other.

What I'm referring to is the numerous times a cager (motorist) cuts off or crowds out a motorcyclist causing the motorcyclist to crash but there is no contact. Does the motorist in this situation have an obligation to stop?

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by tranquility

That's my pt, you're so cocksure about this simple one yet still got it wrong, you're not qualified to talk about anything that is even a smidge more complex as it definitely won't be anything logical, yet I'm sure you're gonna blabber more nonsense.

Maybe because I went through 6 months of Law Enforcement training and was a patrolman for 2 years. You seem to make everything personal.

[tranquility]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

Maybe because I went through 6 months of Law Enforcement training and was a patrolman for 2 years.

Well, you need retraining then if you think the truck is worse than the Accord.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by zx10guy

Sedan_Clan

Maybe this question is better suited in your questions thread. But since the topic of the truck not stopping has come up repeatedly here. What about this situation where there's no contact between two parties yet one crashes as a direct result of the actions of the other.

What I'm referring to is the numerous times a cager (motorist) cuts off or crowds out a motorcyclist causing the motorcyclist to crash but there is no contact. Does the motorist in this situation have an obligation to stop?

Technically, no. Is it the responsible and humane thing to do in the situation you described? Absolutely!

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

You post some low quality clip

You're right I posted a clip from the 2nd video. I had actually confused the two as being from the same recording device. I didn't realize that the first video is taken by the driver with his phone (Yet another violation added to the video) and the second video is the dash cam. I only focused on the 2nd video because it was longer. Here is that same section of time from the first video. They clearly made contact.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

You're right I posted a clip from the 2nd video. I had actually confused the two as being from the same recording device. I didn't realize that the first video is taken by the driver with his phone (Yet another violation added to the video) and the second video is the dash cam. I did not realize that, only focusing on the 2nd video. Here is that same section of time from the first video. They clearly made contact.

[img]

View post on imgur.com

[/img]

They did not clearly make contact in that video.

[shiftdnb]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

They did not clearly make contact in that video.

you're not blind, if you can't see that then it's just you not wanting to see it.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by shiftdnb

you're not blind, if you can't see that then it's just you not wanting to see it.

Ok.