Is it legal to hit other cars on the road?

In article >, says...
>If I have the right of way, like on an X intersection with a minor road,
>where the minor road has stop signs, mine does not. If someone is making a
>left turn from the minor road onto my road, but his movement is blocked by
>cars in front of him. Is it legal for me to hit his car?
>Suppose I could stop, but I'm angry that they are blocking my way and I
>think the insurance settlement might be more than my car's market value. Is
>it OK for me to just keep going and take my right of way, even though I
>could stop to prevent the collision?

This question explains the driving behavior I see so often on the road.
The answer is of course not!
------------
Alex

In article .com>,
says...

>But how can the state prove you chose to NOT prevent the crash? The
>other driver had no business pulling in front of you and he's to blame.
>You just say sumping like "hey - i tried to stop but there wasn't
>time."

Why am I not surprised with your answer? Purposely doing something that
will cause others harm is criminal behaior. You should run to jail and turn
yourself in before you kill again.
--------------
Alex

Cool. "I tried to stop, but there wasn't time. Sorry my fender crushed
LBMHBF's skull, but the skull was empty anyways."

Fortunately most of them aren't smart enough to figure out how to
breed. Thank heavens for Darwinism.

"N8N" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Universal Soldier wrote:
> > N8N wrote:
> >
> > > Listen up, you sniveling pile of sub-human protoplasm - your
> continued
> > > quoting of me
> >
> > Why are you so angry, Nate? You are chimping out like that pizza
> parlor
> > customer. What do you have against this quote? Please explain.
> >
> > "Ad hominem would imply that there's no basis for the things people
> are
> > saying about
> you. Based on your posts, I don't think that that applies."
> > -- Nate Nagel, 2005
>
> Chimping out? You mean you're going to beat me up? Oooh, I'm scared.
> (I thought violence wasn't the answer?)

He's an American neo-con rightard....violence is the answer to EVERYTHING!

There She Was Just A-Clayton Down The Street... wrote:
> "N8N" > wrote in message
> oups.com...
> >
> > Universal Soldier wrote:
> > > N8N wrote:
> > >
> > > > Listen up, you sniveling pile of sub-human protoplasm - your
> > continued
> > > > quoting of me
> > >
> > > Why are you so angry, Nate? You are chimping out like that pizza
> > parlor
> > > customer. What do you have against this quote? Please explain.
> > >
> > > "Ad hominem would imply that there's no basis for the things
people
> > are
> > > saying about
> > you. Based on your posts, I don't think that that applies."
> > > -- Nate Nagel, 2005
> >
> > Chimping out? You mean you're going to beat me up? Oooh, I'm
scared.
> > (I thought violence wasn't the answer?)
>
> He's an American neo-con rightard....violence is the answer to
EVERYTHING!

As opposed to the dimocratic lieberals, who believe bending over and
spreading their butt cheeks apart is the answer to everything.

"Universal Soldier" > wrote in message
...
> If I have the right of way, like on an X intersection with a minor road,
> where the minor road has stop signs, mine does not. If someone is making a
> left turn from the minor road onto my road, but his movement is blocked by
> cars in front of him. Is it legal for me to hit his car?
>
> Suppose I could stop, but I'm angry that they are blocking my way and I
> think the insurance settlement might be more than my car's market value.
> Is
> it OK for me to just keep going and take my right of way, even though I
> could stop to prevent the collision?

I have no idea where you live but I sincerely hope it isn't anywhere near
me. What you don't seem to understand is that you never "have" the right of
way but are required to "Yield" it under certain circumstances. I've had a
drivers license in 8 states and two Asian nations and know of nowhere one
"has" the right of way. Can you quote the statute or code wherein one "has"
the right of way" Every driver is obligated to avoid an accident, even when
lawfully operating his motor vehicle.

"Scott en Aztlán" > wrote in message
news
> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 05:40:06 -0500, Nate Nagel >
> wrote:
>
>>Oh look, the two trolls have found each other. Maybe it's true love at
>>last.
>
> Sadly, this place is becoming a troll orgy...
>
It has gotten so bad, that when I loaded the headers
for today (from r.a.d.) it listed 308, then as it downloaded
the messages and applied my killfile it dropped to 190.

And I don't even have LBMHBF killfiled, cause he/she
amuses me.

That is a pretty high noise level for this group,
IME.

Bernard

Big Bill > wrote in
:

> On Wed, 23 Feb 2005 20:53:01 -0800, Universal Soldier
> > wrote:
>
>>Dan Ganek wrote:
>>
>>> Universal Soldier wrote:
>>>> If I have the right of way, like on an X intersection with a minor
>>>> road, where the minor road has stop signs, mine does not. If someone
>>>> is making a left turn from the minor road onto my road, but his
>>>> movement is blocked by cars in front of him. Is it legal for me to
>>>> hit his car?
>>>>
>>>> Suppose I could stop, but I'm angry that they are blocking my way
>>>> and I think the insurance settlement might be more than my car's
>>>> market value. Is it OK for me to just keep going and take my right
>>>> of way, even though I could stop to prevent the collision?
>>>
>>> Are you serious? Of course it's not legal. Even in MA it's illegal.
>>> You have a legal responsibility to prevent an accident under all
>>> conditions.
>>>
>>> /dan
>>
>>Let's say I'm making a left turn from a minor road, and you are coming
>>from my left. Normally, I would wait until the road is clear for me to
>>make the left turn. But by your logic, it's OK to drive into the middle
>>of the road, blocking you, stand there, until there is a gap in the
>>traffic coming from my right, and move only then? Because if it's not
>>OK for you to hit my car (according to you), I can do whatever the hell
>>I want.
>
> No.
> In most states, it's illegal to block an intersection; meaning, you
> can't enter an intersection without a reasonable expectation that you
> can clear the intersection before you become a blockage to other
> traffic,
>>
>>More realistically, how would the courts decide or insurance companies
>>settle in the above scenario - that's what determines "right" and
>>"wrong".
>
> No, courts in this scenario would determine who is legally liable for
> any damages.
> Courts do not determine "right" and "wrong". They determine whether
> the law has been violated.
> And, no, laws don't define "right" and "wrong", either.
>

They can also come out differently in criminal and civil law, i.e. they
would uphold a ticket for blocking if prohibited* but they would award
damages to the victim of deliberate ramming, albeit which the insurance
company would not pay out, as it's not an accident.

To put it another way, if someone is blocking the junction and you ram them
_on_purpose_, you will have to pay to fix their car out of your own pocket.

*Where I originally come from (England) AFAIK it's only prohibited to block
a junction if it's specially marked with yellow cross hatching (a so-called
'box' junction) but it's possible it may apply to all junctions in this
state (Maryland).

On 25 Feb 2005 13:59:56 +0100, "Alun L. Palmer" >
wrote:

>> No, courts in this scenario would determine who is legally liable for
>> any damages.
>> Courts do not determine "right" and "wrong". They determine whether
>> the law has been violated.
>> And, no, laws don't define "right" and "wrong", either.
>>
>
>They can also come out differently in criminal and civil law, i.e. they
>would uphold a ticket for blocking if prohibited* but they would award
>damages to the victim of deliberate ramming, albeit which the insurance
>company would not pay out, as it's not an accident.

Absolutely; the criteria concerning evidence is different for criminal
and civil suits.
>
>To put it another way, if someone is blocking the junction and you ram them
>_on_purpose_, you will have to pay to fix their car out of your own pocket.

I agree.
>
>*Where I originally come from (England) AFAIK it's only prohibited to block
>a junction if it's specially marked with yellow cross hatching (a so-called
>'box' junction) but it's possible it may apply to all junctions in this
>state (Maryland).

--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"