The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Dashcam" Thread
Discussion
andy-xr said:
You've got it backwards. Seriously, are you thick? If you are, just say so because I can lower my expectation of what to expect.
The driver in this case did nothing wrong, decided to stop to avert an accident from a cyclist who was going too quick and trying too hard to keep going when they didnt have right of way.
If you, Finlandia and Thermo think she did nothing wrong because she had "right of way" and that somehow absolved her of looking out for potential hazards, if only for her own safety, it's you guys that wrong.The driver in this case did nothing wrong, decided to stop to avert an accident from a cyclist who was going too quick and trying too hard to keep going when they didnt have right of way.
If she'd been paying attention he wouldn't have "suddenly appeared" in her peripheral vision causing her to panic stop.
Centurion07 said:
If you, Finlandia and Thermo think she did nothing wrong because she had "right of way" and that somehow absolved her of looking out for potential hazards, if only for her own safety, it's you guys that wrong.
If she'd been paying attention he wouldn't have "suddenly appeared" in her peripheral vision causing her to panic stop.
If she'd been paying attention he wouldn't have "suddenly appeared" in her peripheral vision causing her to panic stop.
Finlandia said:
Centurion07 said:
Of course she should have f
king checked!!!!! It's called "being aware of your surroundings". Do you not look around you when driving to assess any potential hazards?
And the cyclist did this?king checked!!!!! It's called "being aware of your surroundings". Do you not look around you when driving to assess any potential hazards?andy-xr said:
When riding do you not ease off the throttle a little, maybe cover the brakes when going past a junction that a car is approaching and SUPPOSED to stop at?
Having right of way is no guarantee that other vehicles will stop when and where they're supposed to.
YOU are the one primarily responsible for YOUR safety, which means looking out for potential hazards EVERYWHERE.
Edited by Centurion07 on Wednesday 30th September 17:25
Centurion07 said:
andy-xr said:
You've got it backwards. Seriously, are you thick? If you are, just say so because I can lower my expectation of what to expect.
The driver in this case did nothing wrong, decided to stop to avert an accident from a cyclist who was going too quick and trying too hard to keep going when they didnt have right of way.
If you, Finlandia and Thermo think she did nothing wrong because she had "right of way" and that somehow absolved her of looking out for potential hazards, if only for her own safety, it's you guys that wrong.The driver in this case did nothing wrong, decided to stop to avert an accident from a cyclist who was going too quick and trying too hard to keep going when they didnt have right of way.
If she'd been paying attention he wouldn't have "suddenly appeared" in her peripheral vision causing her to panic stop.
You can be aware of your surroundings all you like, it doesn't stop some nutter on a bike not knowing how to use a roundabout.
k silver car? lol
Centurion07 said:
YOU are the one primarily responsible for YOUR safety, which means looking out for potential hazards EVERYWHERE.
Like that big fEdited by Centurion07 on Wednesday 30th September 17:25
k silver car? lol
I think it becomes all the more apparent that this is a militant / reckless cyclist who is intent on getting YouTube views.
Watching the same video (again) we are still droning on about now it is clear the cyclist did not slow to a sensible pace and the Merc driver had wrongly assumed that the cyclist might take the first exit and stopped when the cyclist disappeared into her blind spot.
Funny that if the roles were reversed and a car had got as close to this cyclist as he had intended to get to the Merc for the sakes of 'preserving traffic flow' it no doubt would have been suitable footage for one of his little videos and suitable arm-flailing and swearing...
Watching the same video (again) we are still droning on about now it is clear the cyclist did not slow to a sensible pace and the Merc driver had wrongly assumed that the cyclist might take the first exit and stopped when the cyclist disappeared into her blind spot.
Funny that if the roles were reversed and a car had got as close to this cyclist as he had intended to get to the Merc for the sakes of 'preserving traffic flow' it no doubt would have been suitable footage for one of his little videos and suitable arm-flailing and swearing...
Centurion07 said:
Which silver car? Still confused.
He quite obviously means the Mercedes, white and silver being similar colours it's an easy mistake to make especially if watched on a small screen some time ago. Can you really not work that out for yourself or are you just being deliberately awkward?Centurion07 said:
SpeedMattersNot said:
The reason why heebeegt and the other guy are on their own, is because they're wrong.
Alternatively it's because we credit other drivers with more observational awareness and control of their vehicles than they have. Obviously you and the others, by siding primarily with the car, don't actually possess those skills.And yes, there should be a voting system for each clip.
I'd argue the cars problem was having observational awareness. Like they say, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. If she didn't have any, she wouldn't have even noticed the bicycle steaming in.
The route cause was the cyclist and your issue is that you believe the woman is deliberately causing an obstruction.
Ghibli said:
As for the women stopping I don't know where she thought he was going , behind or in front?
Maybe she thought what any other person would, that he would slow down for a Give WAYCyclist was at fault, inexperienced driver understandably panicked DUE to the Cyclist being a t
t
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff