Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Driver was texting - 2 killed, 38 injured - Page 5 — Parallax Forums

Driver was texting - 2 killed, 38 injured

1235»

Comments

  • Ron CzapalaRon Czapala Posts: 2,418
    edited 2011-12-18 12:59
    DavidSmith wrote: »
    In most of the world w Western Law, you are innocent until proven guilty - i.e. you don't even have to present a defense.

    Here in California, USA, there is SORT of an exception. If you rear end somebody in traffic, for practical purposes you are guilty until you prove there was some mitigating factor.

    There is no law against following too close - you screw up, you pay. Considering the absence of an enforceable law, there are remarkably few (considering all the drivers) rear end accidents.

    Same thing for other "problems". Don't ban electronics while driving. If you are involved in an accident while texting (or anything else) start getting ready to prove your innocence - 'cause the other guy doesn't have to prove you guilty.

    Unfortunately some crooks stage rear-end accidents to commit insurance fraud. See "Swoop & squat" http://www.insurancefraud.org/staged_accidents.htm
    Swoop and Squat. A suspect vehicle suddenly swoops in front of you and jams on the brakes, causing a rear-end collision. Often the suspect car has passengers who pretend to have painful back or neck injuries, even though the collision was at low speed. The driver and passengers then make large collision and injury claims against your auto policy, for example.
  • DavidSmithDavidSmith Posts: 36
    edited 2011-12-18 13:03
    Ron Czapala,

    That changes nothing.
  • Ron CzapalaRon Czapala Posts: 2,418
    edited 2011-12-18 13:05
    DavidSmith wrote: »
    That changes nothing.

    I agree - I was just pointing out that there is always someone out there trying to take advantage
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2011-12-18 13:10
    graffix wrote: »
    Really you've been driving for 33yrs PJ?

    I don't know about PJ, but I have.
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2011-12-18 13:12
    DavidSmith wrote: »
    There is no law against following too close - you screw up, you pay.

    I believe this to be false, but do not have the time to search for something to cite right now.
  • bill190bill190 Posts: 769
    edited 2011-12-18 13:54
    DavidSmith wrote: »
    There is no law against following too close - you screw up, you pay. Considering the absence of an enforceable law, there are remarkably few (considering all the drivers) rear end accidents.

    Oregon...
    Police are ticketing tailgaters.
    Keep your distance.
    It’s the law.
    http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/TS/police/tailgatingbro.pdf?ga=t

    California...
    V C Section 21703 Following Too Closely
    http://dmv.ca.gov/pubs/vctop/d11/vc21703.htm

    Arizona...
    28-730. Following too closely
    http://www.azleg.gov/FormatDocument.asp?inDoc=/ars/28/00730.htm&Title=28&DocType=ARS
  • W9GFOW9GFO Posts: 4,010
    edited 2011-12-18 14:49
    DavidSmith wrote: »
    ... there are remarkably few (considering all the drivers) rear end accidents.

    I don't know the statistics but based upon my own observations, rear end accidents are very common. I would estimate that over 90% of the accidents that I have witnessed, or passed by after the fact, are rear end accidents. Many of them a chain of vehicles. Each time I see this I am reminded that the very simple precaution of following at a safe distance would prevent nearly every single one of them.

    @bill190, thanks for looking those up.
Sign In or Register to comment.