The "Sh*t Driving Caught On Dashcam" Thread
Discussion
GreatGranny said:
Dick Turpin said:
But its got to be the cyclists fault surely! ;-)heebeegeetee said:
Vipers said:
Either way, the pedestrian must accept some of the blame,
She's under the legal age of responsibilty, so in law she doesn't, I believe.https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pp5J74C1D3k
Not my video and apologies if this has been done before - very dangerous overtake by tipper truck.
Not my video and apologies if this has been done before - very dangerous overtake by tipper truck.
duff said:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pp5J74C1D3k
Not my video and apologies if this has been done before - very dangerous overtake by tipper truck.
Should not hold a licence.Not my video and apologies if this has been done before - very dangerous overtake by tipper truck.
DoubleSix said:
Indeed.
And it's pretty obvious the black car traveling the opposite way obscures the drivers view of the pedestrian until very late on in the scenario.
Which is *exactly* the reason I'd at a near halt, and not doing 20mph+. The restricted view is the reason to be cautious, not regardless.And it's pretty obvious the black car traveling the opposite way obscures the drivers view of the pedestrian until very late on in the scenario.
saaby93 said:
So although youd be cut up about it, it's not your fault.
I couldn't disagree more strongly. If I ever hit a pedestrian on a zebra crossing I will only ever view it as 100% my fault, unless it turned out the ped had suddenly appeared from outer space or something. I would expect the law to see it the same way too. It mitigate my punishment that the girl ran onto the crossing, but the collision could only be 100% my fault imo. Until I'm certain that it is clear to do so, I cannot cross a zebra crossing (or any other give way situation).
heebeegeetee said:
DoubleSix said:
Indeed.
And it's pretty obvious the black car traveling the opposite way obscures the drivers view of the pedestrian until very late on in the scenario.
Which is *exactly* the reason I'd at a near halt, and not doing 20mph+. The restricted view is the reason to be cautious, not regardless.And it's pretty obvious the black car traveling the opposite way obscures the drivers view of the pedestrian until very late on in the scenario.
saaby93 said:
So although youd be cut up about it, it's not your fault.
I couldn't disagree more strongly. If I ever hit a pedestrian on a zebra crossing I will only ever view it as 100% my fault, unless it turned out the ped had suddenly appeared from outer space or something. I would expect the law to see it the same way too. It mitigate my punishment that the girl ran onto the crossing, but the collision could only be 100% my fault imo. Until I'm certain that it is clear to do so, I cannot cross a zebra crossing (or any other give way situation).
Some black & white thinking right there.
heebeegeetee said:
Vipers said:
Either way, the pedestrian must accept some of the blame,
She's under the legal age of responsibilty, so in law she doesn't, I believe.Bet she looks now though.
heebeegeetee said:
I couldn't disagree more strongly. If I ever hit a pedestrian on a zebra crossing I will only ever view it as 100% my fault.
I seem remember Von saying the same thing some time ago, driver is 100% to blame, I even argued what if they suddenly run across the crossing, Von still laid blame on the driver. Now is that nuts or what!heebeegeetee said:
If I ever hit a pedestrian on a zebra crossing I will only ever view it as 100% my fault, unless it turned out the ped had suddenly appeared from outer space or something.
Well yes, but you can look a bit closer to home than outer space as you can see in the clip.heebeegeetee said:
I would expect the law to see it the same way too. It mitigate my punishment that the girl ran onto the crossing, but the collision could only be 100% my fault imo.
Until I'm certain that it is clear to do so, I cannot cross a zebra crossing (or any other give way situation).
You would have checked it's clear, which would have been before that black car is on the crossing.Until I'm certain that it is clear to do so, I cannot cross a zebra crossing (or any other give way situation).
Youd make your judgement point about 10-25 ft or so before the crossing, and if anything untoward you would have time to stop.
At the point shown in that photo, if you see the runner land at on the crossing, by the time your brain has registered, the car is probably straddling the crossing, by the time youve hit the brake, if you feel you need to, your car is completely clear of it.
That's just thinking time and physics, and normally that's fine as the pedestrian walks behind you.
In this clip the runner has gone into the side of your car, before your foot has done anything.
It shouldnt be surprising for it to be normal to see clips of pedestrians stepping onto a crossing with the car in that position, knowing that the car wil be long gone while they walk across the road. It's the car behind they'll be watching to check it's stopped
Edited by saaby93 on Thursday 9th July 13:08
saaby93 said:
You would have checked it's clear, which would have been before that black car is near the crossing.
Youd make your judgement point about 25 ft or so before the crossing, and if anything untoward you would have time to stop.
At the point shown in that photo, if you see the runner land at on the crossing, by the time your brain has registered, the car is probably straddling the crossing, by the time youve hit the brake, if you feel you need to, your car is completely clear of it.
That's just thinking time and physics, and normally that's fine as the pedestrian walks behind you.
In this clip the runner has gone into the side of your car, before your foot has done anything.
It shouldnt be surprising for it to be normal to see clips of pedestrians stepping onto a crossing with the car in that position, knowing that the car wil be long gone while they walk across the road. It's the car behind they'll be watching to check it's stopped
I really can't agree with this. Throughout the film the pedestrian is walking towards the crossing, and the Golf driver must have been able to see this. Youd make your judgement point about 25 ft or so before the crossing, and if anything untoward you would have time to stop.
At the point shown in that photo, if you see the runner land at on the crossing, by the time your brain has registered, the car is probably straddling the crossing, by the time youve hit the brake, if you feel you need to, your car is completely clear of it.
That's just thinking time and physics, and normally that's fine as the pedestrian walks behind you.
In this clip the runner has gone into the side of your car, before your foot has done anything.
It shouldnt be surprising for it to be normal to see clips of pedestrians stepping onto a crossing with the car in that position, knowing that the car wil be long gone while they walk across the road. It's the car behind they'll be watching to check it's stopped
Then as the Golf nears the crossing the driver loses sight of the pedestrian, but he still knows there is a pedestrian walking towards the crossing. As the driver's view becomes less so must his speed.
If that had been me, sure, i might have had a last second dab of the brake to bring the car to a halt to give way to the pedestrian as I must, but there's no way I'd cross at 20mph+ in the full knowledge that I have sen a pedestrian approaching the crossing (but now I can't see the crossing or pedestrian clearly).
I'll say again, the restricted view is the reason to be coming to halt, not an excuse for hitting a pedestrian. You slow down needlessly in that scenario, what's the worst that can happen? Your journey delayed by 2 seconds? As opposed to hitting someone, possibly injuring them, finding yourself in court, endorsements, higher premiums? I know which I'd choose.
heebeegeetee said:
I'll say again, the restricted view is the reason to be coming to halt, not an excuse for hitting a pedestrian. You slow down needlessly in that scenario, what's the worst that can happen? Your journey delayed by 2 seconds? As opposed to hitting someone, possibly injuring them, finding yourself in court, endorsements, higher premiums? I know which I'd choose.
Someone else said the view was restricted by the black carIt doesn't look like it was, at the decision point.
You've got to decide there, whether the pedestrian is going to run (unlikely) across in front of you, so you stop
Or you decide that by the time the black car's come through and the pedestrians started walking, you'll be already through the crossing.
As you saw neither happened, the pedestrian ran across into the side of the car.
Who would have expected that
It's a useful road safety video
I think I'd have stopped - any other votes?
Edited by saaby93 on Thursday 9th July 13:53
Um I watched a couple of the videos that were offered at the end of this clip.
There's one of the usual Russian dash-cam compilations.
The incident that unfolds between 0:41 and 0:55 - I defy anyone not to s
t themselves if they were in the white car!!
Don't watch the first incident if you're at all squeamish though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac-u0XYVs-U
These videos are always a salutary lesson in how quickly things can go badly wrong; but I am constantly astonished at how bad driving standards seem to be in Russia.
There's one of the usual Russian dash-cam compilations.
The incident that unfolds between 0:41 and 0:55 - I defy anyone not to s
t themselves if they were in the white car!!Don't watch the first incident if you're at all squeamish though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac-u0XYVs-U
These videos are always a salutary lesson in how quickly things can go badly wrong; but I am constantly astonished at how bad driving standards seem to be in Russia.
wibblebrain said:
Um I watched a couple of the videos that were offered at the end of this clip.
There's one of the usual Russian dash-cam compilations.
The incident that unfolds between 0:41 and 0:55 - I defy anyone not to st themselves if they were in the white car!!
Don't watch the first incident if you're at all squeamish though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac-u0XYVs-U
These videos are always a salutary lesson in how quickly things can go badly wrong; but I am constantly astonished at how bad driving standards seem to be in Russia.
That explains a lot about the Russians you encounter on holiday.There's one of the usual Russian dash-cam compilations.
The incident that unfolds between 0:41 and 0:55 - I defy anyone not to s
t themselves if they were in the white car!!Don't watch the first incident if you're at all squeamish though.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac-u0XYVs-U
These videos are always a salutary lesson in how quickly things can go badly wrong; but I am constantly astonished at how bad driving standards seem to be in Russia.
saaby93 said:
heebeegeetee said:
I'll say again, the restricted view is the reason to be coming to halt, not an excuse for hitting a pedestrian. You slow down needlessly in that scenario, what's the worst that can happen? Your journey delayed by 2 seconds? As opposed to hitting someone, possibly injuring them, finding yourself in court, endorsements, higher premiums? I know which I'd choose.
Someone else said the view was restricted by the black carIt doesn't look like it was, at the decision point.
You've got to decide there, whether the pedestrian is going to run (unlikely) across in front of you, so you stop
Or you decide that by the time the black car's come through and the pedestrians started walking, you'll be already through the crossing.
As you saw neither happened, the pedestrian ran across into the side of the car.
Who would have expected that
It's a useful road safety video
I think I'd have stopped - any other votes?
Edited by saaby93 on Thursday 9th July 13:53
And don't forget guys, we are sitting watching a video, how many of us have made an error of judgement without consequences, no one is perfect, if they were there wouldn't be an accidents on our roads. I am sure the driver didn't deliberately drive across the crossing knowing they would hit someone running across it.
Edited by Vipers on Thursday 9th July 17:41
Ghibli said:
Did you notice the woman on the crossing was looking to her right,whereas I always look down the side of vehicles, not saying the cyclist isn't at fault, tt, but I have drummed it into my family that green doesn't mean go, and just because one car stops doesn't mean others will.No chance, but I hope the cyclist was reported.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff