Anyone with a BRZ get brake-checked tonight?

[HachiRo]

Just gonna post his here for anyone that knows a BRZ that may have gotten hit-and run.





I don't care how slow you're driving or anything, brake-checking someone is pretty bad, but having them hit your car and just leaving is fucked up.

[PMok]

Originally Posted by HachiRo

Just gonna post his here for anyone that knows a BRZ that may have gotten hit-and run.





I don't care how slow you're driving or anything, brake-checking someone is pretty bad, but having them hit your car and just leaving is fucked up.

you know what's great though, is posting online with your name and details of how you overtly violated the law by causing an accident and leaving the scene. I'm sure karma will catch up with him sooner or later...

[PandaBRZ]

Good catch, HachiRo. Hope they find this idiot.

[stugray]

Sorry but at least in MY state if you rear end someone for any reason, it is the person doing the rear-ending that is at fault.

As far as the cops are concerned, if you are following so close you cannot absorb a "brake check" then YOU are at fault.

And if I am driving on the highway and someone tailgates me when I have nowhere else to go (following the next person at legal gap), I will give bigger & bigger brake checks until they get the message.

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.

[s2d4]

Yeah, the ass rider is the one at fault in my part of the world too.
Serve the wanker right, hope the clown learn to drive better on public roads or lose his license altogether.

[AFRichZC6]

The tailgater is the one at fault since he/she is the one who controls the distance to the vehicle in front. As the driver behind, you have the responsibility of maintaining a safe distance to slow or stop to prevent a collision. Even if the driver in front didn't intentionally brake-check the driver behind, there may have been a legitimate reason he/she had to apply the brakes abruptly, and the result would have been the same (sans leaving the scene).

[fatalelement]

You do always end up being responsible for rear-ending in my state too BUT there are many legal provisions that do void that kind of presumption if the other person intentionally attempts to cause an accident. Also, leaving the scene of an accident that isn't your fault is still a crime. In fact, if the person who hit you is injured in any way, in many places that becomes a felony.

So both people are idiots.

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Tapatalk

[PMok]

yes ^^ what he said.

Brake checking someone while not explicitly legal, is still a d*ck thing to do most of the time. That's fine if that's how you want to act. And if you don't mind being rear ended when you take that kind of chance. Totally your call. Most of us have better things to do than unexpectedly be involved in an accident (that you contributed to) and stop whatever you're doing to pull over and make sure no one is hurt, check for damage, exchange info etc. Which is what is required by the law. So that second part, where yeah you ignore the laws and leave the scene of an accident you were involved in, that is where it goes wrong.

[tonylop33]

22109. No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle on a highway without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear when there is opportunity to give the signal.
22400. (a) ...No person shall bring a vehicle to a complete stop upon a highway so as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the stop is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.

[stugray]

Originally Posted by tonylop33

22109. No person shall stop or suddenly decrease the speed of a vehicle on a highway without first giving an appropriate signal in the manner provided in this chapter to the driver of any vehicle immediately to the rear when there is opportunity to give the signal.

So what is the "manner provided in this chapter"? Maybe brake lights?

And whay have laws that are unenforceable

Originally Posted by tonylop33

22400. (a) ...No person shall bring a vehicle to a complete stop upon a highway so as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the stop is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.

I cannot see EVER charging someone with this crime.
If someone comes to a stop on the freeway, they can do it "for any reason whatsoever" and still comply with that law.
You would have to be a complete idiot to not be able to come up with an excuse that qualifies for "safe operation".
I'm sorry sir, but a bug flew in my eye, there was a bee in the car, and I am allergic, I was eating some hot cheetos, rubbed my eyes, and they started burning, A squirrel ran in front of me, I heard tires screeching... maybe it came from the radio, I felt faint and decided to stop the vehicle, A spider crawled across my face, I thought I was going to throw up....

[tahdizzle]

Originally Posted by stugray

So what is the "manner provided in this chapter"? Maybe brake lights?

And whay have laws that are unenforceable



I cannot see EVER charging someone with this crime.
If someone comes to a stop on the freeway, they can do it "for any reason whatsoever" and still comply with that law.
You would have to be a complete idiot to not be able to come up with an excuse that qualifies for "safe operation".
I'm sorry sir, but a bug flew in my eye, there was a bee in the car, and I am allergic, I was eating some hot cheetos, rubbed my eyes, and they started burning, A squirrel ran in front of me, I heard tires screeching... maybe it came from the radio, I felt faint and decided to stop the vehicle, A spider crawled across my face, I thought I was going to throw up....

I'm with yah on the brake lights.

Those are all reasonable reasons to stop your car. They are not reasonable reasons to stop your car on the highway to obstruct traffic.
All of those reasons do not give excuse to stop your car in the middle of a highway.

[stugray]

Originally Posted by tahdizzle

I'm with yah on the brake lights.

Those are all reasonable reasons to stop your car. They are not reasonable reasons to stop your car on the highway to obstruct traffic.
All of those reasons do not give excuse to stop your car in the middle of a highway.

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

Are you saying that someone who just got chili powder in their eye should not stop the vehicle immediately?
I have actually done this before, and I was BARELY able to find the shoulder before coming to a stop.
And my point was - anything can make someone panic.
Panic alone is justification enough to stop the car.

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....

[Bergen23]

Both parties in the wrong, one for following too closely, the other technically for a hit and run, as well as being a royal asshole.

I tend to try and not come within at least one car length of people when I drive on the highway, especially in the Toronto area as drivers there are notoriously aggressive drivers and brake check quite often.

When I feel someone is following too closely behind me, I give a light tap on the brakes just to let them know I think they're too close, then move over to the right as quickly as possible when it's safe to do so to let them get by.

[tahdizzle]

If in doubt stop the vehicle is not a good idea.

If in doubt, pull over. Yes. Not stop. You want to know why? You are in the way of other drivers.