Slam the brakes
By wrecked - 23/01/2012 01:52 - United States
By wrecked - 23/01/2012 01:52 - United States
You must be logged in to be able to post comments!
Hey 30! Schools going great and as a matter of fact I do! Weird that I still have the same opinion after only.. what? 4 days? Strange huh? Just like the fact you haven't been able to let it go! Must of been the highlight of your week. Its okay, I imagine a stuck up b*tch like yourself doesn't get out much, so I understand. Well, hopefully I can do something this week to bring a little more excitement to your life! Have a good night!
36- interesting how ppl don't let things go eh? Anyway, humans do have instincts thats what the Cerebellum part of the brain is for, it guides things like reflexes or how to do something like procreate and so on.. Read up its really interesting I think :) but opinions are all well and good
Well 93, glad you've joined the party! I'm so happy to see you remember me! But, sadly I don't think they're "cheering" me on because of my OPINION: an individuals thought or belief, with no right or wrong side (sorry had to give a little emphasis on the opinion part), but I think they support me because after 4... grueling.. agonizingly painful days I managed to get over it. OR maybe it's because I don't withhold myself, from tunnel visioned b*itches like yourself. Hope you get that stick out of your ass one day. Maybe you'll be more flexible then!
Yeah, and its a shame you just really don't know how to keep your mouth shut. Hey I wouldn't have said anything, but when you CLEARLY try to start shit, yeah I'm gonna give it back. And I'm glad you're just SO confident, I can see you've got life all figured out. So why don't your inflexible mindset and find somebody else to work it upon.
wow, you are being really childish roevera. There is no need for the name calling. Just let it go and move on with your life. @boofgall, She actually said that humans don't have instinct. I don't even have words for this. lmao. @op, I really hope that you don't get sued. I can't believe that home owner. You totaled your car and could have been severely hurt and all he thought about was suing you. People these days, they only care about money.
Absolutely! Anyone ever notice how (where I live in the U.S. anyway) that sidewalks are made right next to the street and the trees are on THE other side of the sidewalk? (I know you all know that children are taught to walk on the sidewalk so I won't say so and I will just let you imagine the horror of running over a bunch kids at a bus stop by the side of the road so you can save the 1 retard child that ran out into the middle of the road?!,. Aww Irony Or are there just no sidewalks where they live maybe? (I hope)
How do you not deserve this? What if there'd been a real child instead of a tree? Are you complaining that the homeowner is trying to recover money you forced him to spend? Or that the hospital thinks normal people shouldn't drive into trees? In order, you should've been aware of your surroundings (enough to know that there's no child around), slammed on the brakes, and then swerved. People like you scare the crap out of me. The most important thing anyone ever told me about driving was to treat it with the same respect as a loaded weapon, because it is. By driving, you have a responsibility to everyone to not fuck it up.
People like you are dumbass' how does he deserve this. What if this was a real child. If it was, he would be getting sued big time by his parents; or if he did what he did, he wouldn't be paying as much as he is now. So if I were you, I'd just shut the hell up because ur Making shit worse for yourself.
So eloquent. What if by trying to avoid the imagined child they hit a real one? It's irrelevant. When driving, you should be aware of your surroundings enough to know if there any children around with the potential to dart into the road. Even if not, slamming on the breaks is appropriate - not running off the road. There's much more likely to be children on the sidewalk than in the road, and they clearly weren't attentive enough to know that there weren't. My point was that this situation should've been impossible, not that we should be hitting children with cars.
"What if there'd been a real child instead of a tree", that made me laugh. I'm pretty sure that if a child was in the place of the tree (which is off the side of the road) I'm pretty sure OP wouldn't have swirved to hit it. And if you're suggesting what would happen if a real child was on the actual ROAD I'd hope OP swirved!! That's what I got from all that and I kinda think you're an idiot that should keep your comments to yourself.
He did drive it with the same respect as a loaded weapon he thought to himself hed rather hit a tree with a loaded weapon than a small child its easy for you to look back and insult him for it but he honestly thought he saw a child you say that scares you well it scares me you wouldnt do the same thing! If you thought you saw a child your saying you wouldnt try to avoid hitting it?
Jesus can people not read? I made a pretty clear comment, then clarified that. I'm saying it should be impossible to confuse some blowing leaves with a child because you should look ahead and be aware of any children around. Then I'm saying that slamming on the brakes is both much much safer and more effective than swerving. If this site is representative of average drivers, I'll never drive again.
I apologize for my comment, your comment didn't make sense to me because by saying, what if a child replaced the tree, I didn't realize you were referring to an Additional child. your second comment made it more clear, and I agree with you, however in occasion breaking isn't the best idea, if he was too close to the child on the road he may be unable to stop, and in Canada here roads are icy. My car doesn't even know what a stop sign is. I try to stop but its like "NOPE!"
Slim, your first comment made perfect sense to me the first time.. I totally agree that swerving up on to a pavement to avoid a child in the road is a stupid thing to do. #33 If OP wasn't observant enough to realise it was not a child in the road what are the chances he saw there were no children on the path? He clearly could not have made the choice to hit a tree in the time it took to think he saw a child and swerve. I'd rather brake and hope I didn't hit the kid, who shouldn't be in the road anyway, than swerve up onto the path and risk the lives of the people walking where they should be.
A few things, first, if it was a very tight laneway with a tree right on the curb it is possible that this would make sense. Especially at night time in a poorly lit area, in which a child could conceivably jump infront of a car and not be seen until you are basically on top of said child. At this point braking would make little to no difference and the only choice is to get out of the way. While swerving all over the road is a bad idea, simply slamming on the brakes is also not always the best idea. A controlled manouver is the ideal response to danger on the roads. Clearly this wasn't controlled, but at the same time, it was a split second decision which may have not been the best one. People shouldn't be judged so harshly for such a reaction when its very easy to sit back and say what someone should have done after the fact.
I really don't see how you can mix those two up... Well at least if the hospital finds you crazy you'll get a little vacation.