Anyone with a BRZ get brake-checked tonight?

[Sypher]

Originally Posted by stugray

They absolutely DO give you reason to stop your car on the highway (although NOT JUST to obstruct traffic)

I even teach my kids that "if in doubt stop the vehicle".
"I didnt want to stop" should never be an excuse for being in an accident.

So I also teach my kids to not tailgate, convincing my wife is a different matter altogether....

All of your statements to this point have been condoning stopping in the middle of the freeway as seen above. Yet below you say you don't condone it.......

Originally Posted by stugray

Thanks for the tips.
However both of you can settle down.
I am NOT condoning Just stopping in the middle of the freeway.
This is a perfect example of taking things out of context.

The whole discussion is about who is at fault in a rear end collision.

I was merely pointing out many reasons WHY people might just stop on a freeway (good reason or not) and that we need to be ready for it at any time.

It is just a fact of driving on the freeway that you might have to come to an instantaneous stop for whatever reason, and there is no "Law" that you can be charged for for doing it.

But if something happens like a freaking boulder drops on the road in front of you (happens here often), you dont hesitate and think "Hmm I wonder if I will inconvenience someone by stopping right now, perhaps I should signal and see if I can perhaps maneuver around it without disrupting traffic too much"
YOU JUST FUCKING STOP!

I agree with you about stopping for a bolder or any hazard in the road but the problem with your example here is that you as the driver stopping your vehicle in an emergency of this sort isn't the real danger. the bolder in this example is. My point is that if you don't stop before the bolder and you hit it you will likely cause more of a road hazard than if you try to make an emergency stop.

Next line up. I agree that you will have to come to an abrupt stop on a freeway at some point. I just happens and most all Californians are aware of that. You learn this very quickly in any large metropolitan area in California.

All of the reasons you posted before the bolder example are good reasons to stop the car on the side of the road. Not in the middle of it.

last but not least the whole discussion is weather the guy that break checked the tailgater had the right to leave the accident. Everyone who knows anything about an auto insurance policy knows that the guy tailgating is in the wrong to start with.

In the state of California it is ILLEGAL to purposely make an action with a vehicle that would cause an accident. But again the tailgater is still wrong. It was also wrong and ILLEGAL the guy left the scene of the accident he was involved in without stopping talking to the owner of the other vehicle involved.

[OmarYasin]

Looks like he totalled his piece of shit jetta a couple days ago haha

[N234]

Do not wait until they go around you because passing is to be done on the left. If you do not have a lane to the left and you are not passing a vehicle, you are in the wrong lane.

The Ontario drivers handbook says to increase the distance in front of you when tailgated. Brake checking is a spiteful exaggeration of that, and certainly makes you a bigger asshole.

Slowing down or brake checking, just like flashing you're lights or tailgating, are both done to send the message.

None of the "messages" are even necessary, unless someone feels that they "belong" in the left lane.
Ideally, person in front sees car approaching and moves over, passer passes and moves over.

[stugray]

Originally Posted by N234

Do not wait until they go around you because passing is to be done on the left. If you do not have a lane to the left and you are not passing a vehicle, you are in the wrong lane.
.

Unless you are in the left lane wanting to pass, but the people in front of you are going slow.

So what is the proper lane configuration in bumper to bumper traffic?
That's right BOTH lanes are full.

[N234]

In bumper to bumper traffic, I try to be understanding. Traffic as a whole will flow faster if all lanes are used and as little lane switching is done by everyone on the road, collectively.

IMHO, if you are wanting to pass, it is the fault of the person in front of you, or the person in the front of the line.

[ndsleep612]

I don't get brake checked when I drive. It's ALWAYS the hater truck drivers on the freeways who purposely swerve to the shoulder to kick up rocks and debris when I'm driving behind them.

[Hydaral]

I never understood this "brake check" thing people do, I'm in Australia and I've never seen it done. Is this just a US thing?

Tailgaters annoy me, but I just think they are idiots that don't know how to drive safely, it's never crossed my mind to try and cause an accident by "brake checking" them, that just sounds idiotic.

"Oh, look at this guy traveling too close behind me, he obviously is driving unsafely. I know what to do, I'll create a situation that will increase the chance of him running into the back of me, then we can spend 15 minutes exchanging insurance information and arguing, possibly resulting is a physical fight, then later I can be without my car for a week or two while it is repaired. Hahaha, that will teach him..."

To me it just seems like a macho guy thing, not too sure why, it just does (I am a male BTW). In the past, if I did want to do something about a tailgater, I gradually slowed down.

I realise that it's kind of pointless now and don't do anything. If they want to follow close, that's their problem, not mine. I do however leave at least a two second gap in front of me so any emergency braking I do can be modulated to perhaps prevent that tailgater from hitting me.

[Ultramaroon]

Doesn't work in a traffic jam but at highway speeds, if you use your windshield washer it sprays the car behind you.

That's kinda fun.

[stugray]

Originally Posted by Hydaral

I never understood this "brake check" thing people do, I'm in Australia and I've never seen it done. Is this just a US thing?

Tailgaters annoy me, but I just think they are idiots that don't know how to drive safely, it's never crossed my mind to try and cause an accident by "brake checking" them, that just sounds idiotic.

"Oh, look at this guy traveling too close behind me, he obviously is driving unsafely. I know what to do, I'll create a situation that will increase the chance of him running into the back of me, then we can spend 15 minutes exchanging insurance information and arguing, possibly resulting is a physical fight, then later I can be without my car for a week or two while it is repaired. Hahaha, that will teach him..."

To me it just seems like a macho guy thing, not too sure why, it just does (I am a male BTW). In the past, if I did want to do something about a tailgater, I gradually slowed down.

I realise that it's kind of pointless now and don't do anything. If they want to follow close, that's their problem, not mine. I do however leave at least a two second gap in front of me so any emergency braking I do can be modulated to perhaps prevent that tailgater from hitting me.

Some people are making the incorrect assumption that this is always meant to cause an accident.

The term came about because to check one's brakes before starting out on a long journey, one would perform a "brake check" by stabbing the brakes to make sure they are capable of locking up.

When I talk about it, it is merely applying the brakes enough to make the brake lights come on.
This is to "remind" the person following that they had better be prepared to stop.
MANY times people tailgate because they are not paying enough attention and need a quick reminder that they are ,in fact, behind the wheel of a vehicle.

The law states that there shall be one car length per 10 MPH of speed.
Therefore at highway speeds 55 MPH, there should be at least 5 car lengths or 50 feet.

So when someone is behind me at 55 MPH so closely that I cannot see their headlights (because they are below my rear hood) , they get a "brake check".
If they still dont get the message, I will just lift the throttle and start coasting for a bit.
That usually works and they back off.

I never just Lock the brakes hoping someone rear-ends me.

[Hydaral]

Originally Posted by stugray

The law states that there shall be one car length per 10 MPH of speed.
Therefore at highway speeds 55 MPH, there should be at least 5 car lengths or 50 feet.

That's the law? That sounds very close, I think most cars are longer that 10 feet, more like 4m (12ft), so that makes it a little over 1 second gap.

[brandonblt2]

Originally Posted by stugray

Thanks for the tips.
However both of you can settle down.
I am NOT condoning Just stopping in the middle of the freeway.
This is a perfect example of taking things out of context.

The whole discussion is about who is at fault in a rear end collision.

I was merely pointing out many reasons WHY people might just stop on a freeway (good reason or not) and that we need to be ready for it at any time.

It is just a fact of driving on the freeway that you might have to come to an instantaneous stop for whatever reason, and there is no "Law" that you can be charged for for doing it.
EXCEPT - in the rare cases where you do something fucking stupid like shut down traffic for dragracing, donuts, or just trying to cause an accident.

But if something happens like a freaking boulder drops on the road in front of you (happens here often), you dont hesitate and think "Hmm I wonder if I will inconvenience someone by stopping right now, perhaps I should signal and see if I can perhaps maneuver around it without disrupting traffic too much"
YOU JUST FUCKING STOP!

Well it better be a damn good reason you CAN be charged for criminal negligence if you stop on a highway for what you perceive as a emergency
is not actually a emergency and it leads to fatality. Check out this Canadian lady that was given life for stopping on a highway to help ducks.

http://rt.com/news/167644-canada-duc...rist-sentence/

[Sypher]

Originally Posted by stugray

The law states that there shall be one car length per 10 MPH of speed.
Therefore at highway speeds 55 MPH, there should be at least 5 car lengths or 50 feet.

Where did you get this info? I just looked up the "Model Traffic Code for Colorado" the state you live in if your info on the left is correct. I could not find this law you speak of. However I have heard this used as a training tool for young drivers to teach them to leave ample space between them and the car ahead. A good rule to go by might I add but not the law.

1008. Following too closely.
(1) The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable
and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicles and the traffic upon and the condition of the
highway.

https://www.codot.gov/library/traffi...l-traffic-code

Please don't give false information.

[Pkush]

Originally Posted by stugray

AND if they try to go around me on the right (and I am following at legal distance), I wont let them in front of me.

Unless you're in traffic that's one of the dumbest things to do. So you're following at a legal distance, but you will stop following at the legal distance and close it up in order to not let people pass you?
I get these kind of people every day. Going 55 in the fast lane and speeding up to 70 when you try to pass them. Good job being an a-hole.

[OmarYasin]

This thread is making its way off topic, the point here is that someone purposely made a brz rear end him, not cool at all, idc how u drive or in what lane, to purposely lock your brakes to make someone crash behind u is wrong, if i was that brz i would have chased this guy an pited him against a wall