By fuckina - 29/11/2010 17:34 - United States
Add a comment - Reply to : #
I'm sorry if I can handle a car going 75 and you can't. Perhaps the DMV ought to administer a high-speed competency test: those capable of handling a car in an emergency situation while going faster than 65mph should have special stickers on the front and back of their car signifying this, so cops won't pull them over, while the rest of you can stick to 55-65.
I agree with #50; speeding is not dangerous (though of course it can compound an already-dangerous situation). The Autobahn, after all, has a lower fatality rate than American highways. But speeding is easy to ticket, because a cop can just sit there and catch it happening, which makes it an easy source of income for the government. By the way, OP, did you mean "broken-down car" or did you actually see a car made of feathers. (Hyphens are your friends.)
But now imagine that "idiot" going 50 pulled out in front of you on a one lane, each direction, road. If you pull off to the right, like drivers ed teaches, you could potentially go over a curb or even hit another car. You can't say that speeding is okay. The US is strict in its driving laws for a reason. Speeding is definitely a no-go. I've seen the accidents that happen because that "idiot going 50" pulled out in front of someone going 70mph who had nowhere to go.
#55, but there are good things about the speeding tickets. It's not like every drivers is like OP and speeds when the cops aren't around. It keeps the drivers under control so they don't hit other cars. The moral of these tickets are good. They're trying to protect everyone on the road...
I would agree with you, except for the fact they "slammed on [their] breaks on the highway". The person who rear ended OP may not have been that close, but if the brakes were slammed on it's possible it's OP's fault. If you're to slow down on a highway, take your foot off the gas... don't break. Highways are high speed and if you stop like that... *facepalms OP*.
True enough. But then there stands the fact that you can't slam on your breaks on a highway due to the inevitability that you will impede traffic flow. Also, isn't it commonly known (at least I thought it was) that you're allowed to go 5-10 km over the speed limit in the states without getting a ticket? Here, in Canada, 5-10 km over the limit is fine, though anything over that is ticket-worthy.
I'm not sure about NY law, but in MA, if they rear-end you, it IS legally their fault. The idea is that it is tailgating if they would hit you if you suddenly stopped. I know most states aren't as extreme in this, but it's pretty close and could have the same law. Check it out. Speeding 5-10 mph over the speed limit on the highway is the norm, but it's not legal. They can pull you over and ticket you for speeding. The less you speed, the higher the chances are it'll be thrown out of court. They also don't *tend* to ticket at such little speeding on highways as it's safer for you to 'go the flow'.
I also think it's their fault. The distance between your car and the next one must be big enough that the car in front can slam their brakes (for example because of an accident in front if them) without the car behind them hitting them. So if you were rear ended I guess it's still their fault, no matter why you slammed your brakes. But if you were speeding "a little" you really wouldn't have to slam your brakes. Braking a little would be appropriate so you kind of deserve it.
I can't help but think if there had been an accident or someone running out that the car behind would also have seen some signs of it at the same time as the car in front braking, which would give them theoretically the same stopping time/distance and therefore the chances of them rear-ending the car in front would be less. Drivers tend not to expect the car in front to stop without any reason at all, such as in this case, where the only indication is the brake lights. Though I do agree that the person behind should always leave enough room. Which is why it's usually classed as the car behind's fault in such a collision.
Cops In AmericaLand can pull you over for going 1 mile over the speed limit since you are doing something illegal, but on highways they generally wait for people going like 15 - 20 mph faster because then they can't use any excuses. You don't drive 80 mph on accident. also when I was first leaning to drive my driving instructor told me that they won't pull you over for like 1-5 mph because people used the excuse of messed up speedometers and they didn't know exactly what speed they were going. Not entirely sure on the validity on what my driving instructor said but now you know.
YDI ... slamming your brakes just makes you suspicious anyway.
Sorry, but if you were only speeding "a little" then you did not need to "slam" on your brakes, gently tapping back down to the correct speed would have been fine. And yes, I'm aware the car behind you would have been doing a similar speed, but if you slam your brakes on out of the blue, they have to react bloody quickly to not hit you. Especially if they didn't see the same 'hazard' you did. Why do people speed? It only leads to accidents when you think you're about to get in trouble and so do something unsafe to make up for this. Safety is one of the most important things than driving, and is more important than being late or looking cool...
i agree with cinn. and also, since you were on the highway I'm guessing you were going at a high speed, so if you "slammed" on your breaks, your speed would go significantly lower and maybe even to a stop, how did you not expect a car to hit you? and slamming on ur breaks in the middle of the highway would probably get you a ticket anyway