How to really avoid an accident

IF this really happened, and I suspect that it didn't, then your
behavior is incomprehensively stupid. Why would you put yourself at
risk by driving straight at him. And why would you drive in a manner
to purposely panic the other driver.

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 19:40:34 -0500, DTJ > wrote:

>On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:16:55 -0700, L Sternn > wrote:
>

>>
>>If you had braked and laid on the horn, an accident could have been
>>avoided and the other car would not have been put at any FURTHER risk
>>by you driving him off the road.
>
>Sorry, you are not even close to knowing **** about this. Try reading
>for comprehension.

I suggest you do the same.


>The fact is that hitting the brakes was NOT GOING
>TO AVOID ANYTHING. The only reason an accident did not happen is that
>fear for his life caused the idiot to MOVE OUT OF THE WAY.
>
>>I hope you were careful to note that there were no pedestrians on the
>>side of the road and that he could safely maneuver off of it.
>
>Nope. I don't need to note anything, as I am always aware of
>everything when I drive.
>
>>Had you tried to avoid it by braking, if there had been an accident
>>anyway, it would have been less serious.
>
>Less serious than no accident? See, as explained in plain English
>above, braking was not, could not, avoid the accident.

Try reading for comprehension.

If you didn't hit him by not braking, you wouldn't have hit him by
braking.


>The asshole
>was moving too slow. There was no way to stop.

Except that you anticipated the potential danger he presented


>At the point of
>impact I would have been doing more than 30 to 40 MPH IME.

Then either your reaction time or your brakes must suck.

>However,
>due to what I'll admit was an incredibly intelligent decision on my
>part, asshole hit his gas pedal and got the **** out of the way.
>

Which he would have done if you had "prepared" for his wrong behavior.

>>Both you AND the idiot who pulled out in front of you shouldn't be
>>behind the wheel.
>
>50% right is an F.

A grade you're probably very familiar with.

100% right is an A - a grade I'm very familiar with.

>
>>You're the reason everyone else's insurance rates are so high and we
>>have sub-moronic speed limits.
>
>Yeah, there you go. Someone uses their brain to avoid an accident an
>you think it was wrong.

You were lucky. An accident was avoided despite your refusal to drive
safely.


> Next time how about if we all act like you
>and just slam into the other driver?

That's not what I would have done.

Next time, how about not pushing your luck and doing everything in you
power to avoid the accident?

You won't always be this lucky.

>
>>>>In your situation above, the fact that you caused someone to drive off the
>>>>road should, at the minimum, be considered as reckless driving.
>>>
>>>No, his was reckless driving, my driving saved me and my vehicle. I
>>>am not the one who recklessly drove out in front of someone doing
>>>55MPH.
>>>
>>>>At the very least, honking the horn and applying the brakes--before the
>>>>anticipated point of collision and not afterwards--is a perfectly viable
>>>>option. That way, even if a collision does occur, the slowing down and
>>>>braking action shows some sort of intent to avoid the collision, again,
>>>>IMHO.
>>>
>>>IMO you could be charged with failure to avoid an accident. In my
>>>case, I avoided one. How? By forcing the other driver to wake up.

DTJ wrote:
>
>>>>> Idiot doesn't bother to stop, and obviously never looked
>>>>> to his left to see me. There is no way for me to stop.
>>>>>
>>>>> In fact, he is now scared ****less, as he finds his accelerator
>>>>> and hits it so hard he drives off the road.
>>If you had braked and laid on the horn, an accident could have been
>>avoided and the other car would not have been put at any FURTHER risk
>>by you driving him off the road.
>
> Sorry, you are not even close to knowing **** about this. Try reading
> for comprehension. The fact is that hitting the brakes was NOT GOING
> TO AVOID ANYTHING. The only reason an accident did not happen is that
> fear for his life caused the idiot to MOVE OUT OF THE WAY.

> braking was not, could not, avoid the accident. The asshole
> was moving too slow. There was no way to stop. At the point of
> impact I would have been doing more than 30 to 40 MPH IME.

Slowing down from 55 to 40 takes what? 1.5 seconds? So you are telling
me that the guy has an unexpected-reaction time, added to delay between
hitting the throttle and his car actually changing course, of only
1.5 seconds?

>>>>> So, in the spirit of sharing the pain, I decide to drive
>>>>> at him head on. I figure if I have to suffer, he should
>>>>> as well. The interesting thing is that now he sees me.

Unfortunately that's not a principle enshrined in law, and
you would be up on some serious charges if you hadn't attempted
to stop. In fact, aiming directly at the guy would bring the
most hazard to his life, whereas braking at full power and catching
the tail end of his car would seem to incur the least hazard.


IMHO the guy noticed you because you shone your lights more directly
at him when you did your course change..

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 20:37:18 -0500, DTJ > wrote:

>On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 23:32:07 -0700, L Sternn > wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 05 Jun 2005 06:22:14 GMT, 223rem > wrote:
>>
>>>I'm pretty sure he braked--it is an instinctive reaction.
>>>
>>
>>If he braked, and used his horn before he passed, then he did
>>everything he could to avoid the accident.
>
>No. Braking and using your horn are only the start.

In this particular case, you would have had to include those in
whatever else you did.

> The correct
>answer is to do everything possible.

Exactly my point.


>In some cases that means driving
>off the road. In others it means stopping. Some times the best thing
>you can do to avoid an accident is to crash into something else.
>
>>Except of course for his initial "preparation". Something tipped him
>>off that this car might blow the stop sign.
>>
>>He didn't say exactly what he did to "prepare", but am I to assume
>>that included braking or at least slowing down too?
>
>OK. Imagine you are North bound on a frontage road just before it
>hits a neighborhood.

Would it be okay if I imagined this on an Eastbound frontage road?

>There is no marked speed limit. If you do 55MPH
>you are likely to get run off the road.

On the frontage road? I don't think so.

>You see a car traveling West
>on the first road from the sub division. You recognize the car is not
>going to stop and look both ways. I can't explain this, it is
>something all good drivers have. An instinctive sense of who is an
>idiot and who isn't. All I can say is I knew he was not going to stop
>completely, and that he was going to pull out in front of me. He did.

With you so far.

>The issue is that as he was traveling West, he was doing a far greater
>speed than when he pulled out. He needed a wake up call.

Still with you.

>I gave it
>to him.

What if he hadn't noticed you?

You still haven't said that you braked or honked BEFORE driving "right
at him", which as far as I can tell simply meant maintaining your lane
and NOT braking or even slowing.

If he hadn't woken up, you'd have hit him at 55 instead of possibly
avoiding him altogether.

If you did brake and honk, just say so and I will agree you did the
right thing by doing everything you could.

Was this a 1-lane frontage road? I'm used to frontage roads with 2-3
lanes, in which case, traffic permitting, you could always swerve
around him.


>
>>>What he refused to do was swerve into oncoming traffic or
>>>into the ditch. He did the right thing. Better to T-bone the
>>>idiot that gets into your way than put yourself in danger
>>>by driving off the road or risk a head on collision.

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 20:39:49 -0500, DTJ > wrote:

>On 6 Jun 2005 10:13:07 -0700, "Ad absurdum per aspera"
> wrote:
>
>>> So, in the spirit of sharing the pain, I decide to drive
>>> at him head on. {...} he finds his
>>> accelerator and hits it so hard he drives off the road.
>>Certainly it does *not* mean deliberately increasing your proximity (in
>>both position and vector) to a dangerous driver.
>>
>>1. Don't hit anything.
>>2. Don't get hit.
>
>Exactly what I accomplished. I guess the fact that I am a superior
>enough driver to do this ****es off some.

Dude - keep your road rage on the road.

Firstly just chill fool, just chill.

The idot driver had his car is "drive" which is a forward gear. It
wouldn't make any sense from a safety standpoint to "drive in front of
him/her head on". What if he scared him/her to the point where he/she
froze up and didn't move? Then what? Head on collision?

First and foremost you should have hit the brakes, panic braking. With
ABS, try to go around as best you could. Without ABS, than stay calm
and brace for impact. Without air bags, duck so you don't hit the
windshield.

At least totalling the idiots car would put him/her off the road for a
while so he/she won't hurt someone else.



<<<<Don't be a ****wit. Learn to post. Learn to read.

It did happen whether you are intelligent enough to believe it or not.
It did not put me at any risk. I WAS GOING TO HIT AND KILL THIS PERSON
unless they moved. There was no room to maneuver except to drive MY
CAR OFF THE ROAD. Given a choice of incurring significant cost to
myself just to save the life of some scum, I choose not to incur the
cost. That left me with killing the son of a bitch, or GETTING HIM TO
WAKE THE **** UP. Which is exactly what happened. >>>>

DTJ wrote:

> If you actually read what I did, you will see
> that my actions caused an accident to be avoided that otherwise would
> not have been.

Now, that's some syntax You should write for AP.

"It did not put me at any risk. I WAS GOING TO HIT AND KILL THIS
PERSON"

JS> You should consider thinking about what have written before
pressing the post icon. I know thinking and writing at the same time
can be difficult, but try it - you might be surprised at the results.
By your own words you were going to "hit and kill that person" then you
are by definition putting yourself at risk. Unless you have an unusual
car it is equipped with brakes and a horn - you should have used them,
and yes possibly driven off the road.

As I said, your behavior is incredibly stupid, and I might also add a
prime example of senselessly aggressive driving. Behaviour like yours
does nothing more than make you feel like a "man" for an instant
although to others you come across as the typical aggressive "****wit"
we've all seen cause many an accident.

On Tue, 07 Jun 2005 04:33:31 GMT, 223rem > wrote:

>DTJ wrote:
>
>> If you actually read what I did, you will see
>> that my actions caused an accident to be avoided that otherwise would
>> not have been.
>
>Now, that's some syntax You should write for AP.

Or a politician, considering the spin he's trying to put on on
irresponsible actions.

.... and may your driving become calm and rational enough that those
words need never be admitted into evidence as People's or Plaintiff's
A, should things not come out so well one day in spite of your
self-assessed superior skill.

Lawyers and the detectives hired to do their legwork do know about Web
searches, you know; and having publicly stated your sentiments about
vigilante driving in some detail, you might wish to avoid putting them
into practice. Or at least hope that nobody connects the proverbial
dots in the aftermath.


With kindest regards,
--Joe