He did it on purpose.

suicide... sad.

lol, nice 1

never swerve. plow threw and keep on moving. the rain will wash away any blood.

wiw

See Shad Gespard video on YouTube.

lol nice one 1

directed at

directed at number 1 lol

Omg dude, seriously? What is wrong with you?

all he has to do is say "like a good neighbor statefarm is there" and then pow his cars fixed. oh and he could get a latte too.

HE DIED????????

134 your pic makes me laugh hard as hell when combined with what you commented.

hahahahaha 134 your comment and picture made me lmao!

in truth, if he did hit the man running, the driver (mr FML) could sue for damages.

yeah... just drive right through him. more fun:D

he legally has the right to do so. So pretend like you'll never see the next one! lol

you get more points that way go for the high score

He doesn't legally, the pedestrian can legally walk as they have right of way. However, if you absentmindedly walk out onto on going traffic then the driver can sue the bastard.

Actually, no. Pedestrians can Not legally walk out in front of cars unless they are at a crosswalk when clearly they have that "right of way". if they walk in the street, it's fair game to hit them, legally speaking that is.

not sure how did the legal system took care of that in USA, but in my country it's always drivers fault, never pedestrian. If you that bastard you're going to jail

agree with 141, pedestrians aren't legally allowed to walk on the road and if they get hit the driver will not always be blamed as they may not have seen them.

how are you going to agree with 141 if you are contradicting him?

Maybe he was on an army base. Pedestrians always have the right of way. What are the odds, though.

or atleast find a crosswalk. jeez.

I believe he j-ran...

maybe he qa being chased by the cops

See, over here we don't have rules about j-walking. And very few people get run over. Best campaign to get it abolished ;£

I think you mean JAY walking .

Why is 155 thumbed down it is jay walking not j walking

agreed! lol

I'm pretty sure there would be no jail time, as long as op wasn't drunk and tried to stop he would be fine. But it would be hard to live knowing you killed someone.

"murder them"??? First it was one person, second you would need intent to murder someone. If OP thought, I'm going to start killing people with my car today and then did kill a person, that would be murder.

I like your pic Joe :) and op, your situation is pretty common, those jay walkers should really get fined... cops are way too lenient on jay walkers.

them doesn't always have to be plural tard face

The way I learned it in high school, them is plural.

you can still refer to a stranger as "them".

hahahahahaha.... them is plural.

them isn't always plural. they always is though.

"Them" isn't always plural. If you can substitute use "him or her," and it would make sense in the sentence, then you can use "them." English lesson over :)

hockeyrocks39 just trolled you all

btw "them is a third person "you"

you are allowed to say two things in one post.

Btw, I don't like it when the same person posts twice in a row.

Lol^^^^

Who cares Joe? Everyone has a right to comment as many times as they want in a row. Maybe the second thought didnt come til after he posted the first one so its not something worth trying to be a bitch over. Just saying....

Well then I have a right to comment and say what I want. Somebody said lol, so I guess your the only bitch here who can't take a joke.

It wouldn't have been jail time for the OP unless the runner was within a crosswalk. Judging from this fml, however, it doesn't appear to be the case. If the runner was just running across the street at a random point and not using the crosswalk, the runner would have been at fault for any injuries, damages, etc. not the OP. It does suck that the after-effect of the OP stopping was to be immediately rear-ended though. Kinda makes you wonder if it was worth it.

true, if it was that bad there is no chance the victim could live, or live normally

The car behind OP rear ended OP making her hit the person in grey

of course it is. op's car didn't jump onto the street, it was there. if you are not able to stop before you rear-end the car in front of you, you shouldn't be allowed to drive

it is still their fault. if you rear end someone, it is always your fault, no matter what

Considering its against the law to be driving that close to the vehicle in front, especially in poor weather... its still the fault of the person behind the OP, #9.

no matter what it's the person driving behind op who is going to be at fault for either driving too close or over the speed limit + not paying attention. j-walker is also a dumbass.

One I thought she didn't hit the peep in grey. Secondly it is not the car that is behind because the peep in grey ran out so this caused this person to brake and the person behind didn't realize so she rear ended her by accident. I would sue the peep in grey. :):):);):

@111 *Facepalm* It IS the fault of the person behind the OP... you should be driving far enough behind that if the car in front of you brakes suddenly you can stop in good time. Guy in grey is at fault for being a retard but ultimately the accident is down to the the second driver. OP didn't hit the pedestrian (at least initially) but was still involved in an accident because the second driver was tailgating.

Oh I see what you guys are getting at

Uhm it's not the OPs fault if the person behind them were tailgating if you can't pull over and either let them get past or they can't pass it's pretty hard to get rid of a dirty tailgater......