Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If I am tailgated, I just drive a little more cautiously and stay aware of the vehicles near me, so as not to cause the a****** behind me to hit me. I don't speed-up, don't play games, don't pull off and let them around.....I obey the law and stick close to the speed limit. If the tailgater get mads, honks, flips me off, pulls closer to my rear, TOUGH!!!!!
Again brake checking is NEVER justified for the reasons you stated. Why risk injury and even possible death to you or anyone else by brake checking? Why not just be the bigger person and move aside and let the other car pass? Sure that tailgater might be a douchebag, but why not just let it slide and save yourself the headache of possibly dealing with damage to your car or worse injury or death because you miscalulated? There are a ton of angry wackjobs out there on the roads and you never know if you'll meet one that will take things too far and it ends up costing you your life. Is minor nothing incidents like this really worth that?
The argument that brakechecking the tailgater was a danger to innocent drivers is a good one, and in fact the only worthwhile argument on that side of the entire debate. The argument that it created a danger for the tailgater is meaningless as far as I'm concerned; if he'd gone into a bridge abutment, I wouldn't have lost a minute of sleep over it, because he'd have had nobody to blame but himself.
This is not about the tailgater being a "douchebag." It's about him being a menace to the life of every driver in that area, driving in an extremely aggressive and dangerous manner and deliberately placing the lives of innocent people at risk. The danger he created is not a "minor incident" at all; he was an extreme danger, and the driver in front had no safe space to "move aside." Nor would he have had for at least several seconds, unless something about the traffic pattern in that zone suddenly and drastically changed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Sterling
The road ahead was COMPLETELY CLEAR, there was space for the brake checker to change lanes but they didn't until after they suddenly braked, cause the tailgater to swerve off the road and almost into oncoming traffic on the highway on the otherside. If you pause the video at 0:30 you can clearly see that the silver van was FAR ahead while the SUV that just merged onto the highway was AT LEAST a car length behind the tailgater in the right lane. That's PLENTY of space for the brake checker to make the lane change and let the tailgater pass.
The road ahead was only completely clear if the driver had sped up, and if he was already going what he felt to be the maximum safe speed, that would have constituted and unsafe act on his part as well. And no, pulling into the adjacent lane just 2 or 3 car lengths ahead of another vehicle was not "PLENTY of space" at all. It was, again, an unsafe act, endangering the innocent driver of a car that was not doing anything wrong (although the smart and considerate thing for that driver to have done in this instance would have been to slow down and create space for the tailgater to go around the car whose rear bumper he was climbing.)
So - again, the tailgater (and nobody but the tailgater) singlehandedly created a situation in which the driver ahead of him had no safe choices. Some of the other choices available to him might have been smarter unsafe choices (I'll certainly give you that), but the suggestion that the brakechecking driver had safe alternatives available to him is not necessarily borne out by the video.
Also, to say that the driver in front simply changed lanes after brakechecking is inaccurate and disingenuous. Watch the video again. He did not change lanes until the vehicle occupying that lane had pulled off to the shoulder and cleared the lane. At the time he brakechecked, he had no safe space to move into to his right.
The tailgating driver first appeared in the video at 16 seconds, and the driver in front of him brakechecked 14 seconds later, at the 30 second mark. The tailgater appeared to be closing the distance the entire time, and seems to have sped up and even more rapidly closed on the driver in front just in the last few seconds. At that point, the driver in front may have legitimately feared he was about to be rearended, and made a split-second decision in reaction to that. If I had been in his place, and come to that conclusion, I may very well have made the same split-second decision. Driving a Subaru, I don't have the horsepower to crack the throttle open and jump out of the way of someone who is closing that fast from such a short distance.
It's quite possible that in that situation, my only two choices (in the amount of time with which I had to work) would have been to brakecheck him or risk letting him rearend me. I may very well have chosen to back him off a bit by tapping the brakes, and immediately accelerating to put some more space between us, which is actually what it looks like the driver in the video really did do (although it's hard to tell whether he in fact did accelerate afterward, given the distance in the video.) What he did may not have been a safe thing to do, but if I were a judge and he stood before me and claimed he thought it was the least unsafe thing to do in that moment, I would quite probably give him the benefit of the doubt and accept his rationale.
The argument that brakechecking the tailgater was a danger to innocent drivers is a good one, and in fact the only worthwhile argument on that side of the entire debate. The argument that it created a danger for the tailgater is meaningless as far as I'm concerned; if he'd gone into a bridge abutment, I wouldn't have lost a minute of sleep over it, because he'd have had nobody to blame but himself.
This is not about the tailgater being a "douchebag." It's about him being a menace to the life of every driver in that area, driving in an extremely aggressive and dangerous manner and deliberately placing the lives of innocent people at risk. The danger he created is not a "minor incident" at all; he was an extreme danger, and the driver in front had no safe space to "move aside." Nor would he have had for at least several seconds, unless something about the traffic pattern in that zone suddenly and drastically changed.
The road ahead was only completely clear if the driver had sped up, and if he was already going what he felt to be the maximum safe speed, that would have constituted and unsafe act on his part as well. And no, pulling into the adjacent lane just 2 or 3 car lengths ahead of another vehicle was not "PLENTY of space" at all. It was, again, an unsafe act, endangering the innocent driver of a car that was not doing anything wrong (although the smart and considerate thing for that driver to have done in this instance would have been to slow down and create space for the tailgater to go around the car whose rear bumper he was climbing.)
So - again, the tailgater (and nobody but the tailgater) singlehandedly created a situation in which the driver ahead of him had no safe choices. Some of the other choices available to him might have been smarter unsafe choices (I'll certainly give you that), but the suggestion that the brakechecking driver had safe alternatives available to him is not necessarily borne out by the video.
Also, to say that the driver in front simply changed lanes after brakechecking is inaccurate and disingenuous. Watch the video again. He did not change lanes until the vehicle occupying that lane had pulled off to the shoulder and cleared the lane. At the time he brakechecked, he had no safe space to move into to his right.
The tailgating driver first appeared in the video at 16 seconds, and the driver in front of him brakechecked 14 seconds later, at the 30 second mark. The tailgater appeared to be closing the distance the entire time, and seems to have sped up and even more rapidly closed on the driver in front just in the last few seconds. At that point, the driver in front may have legitimately feared he was about to be rearended, and made a split-second decision in reaction to that. If I had been in his place, and come to that conclusion, I may very well have made the same split-second decision. Driving a Subaru, I don't have the horsepower to crack the throttle open and jump out of the way of someone who is closing that fast from such a short distance.
It's quite possible that in that situation, my only two choices (in the amount of time with which I had to work) would have been to brakecheck him or risk letting him rearend me. I may very well have chosen to back him off a bit by tapping the brakes, and immediately accelerating to put some more space between us, which is actually what it looks like the driver in the video really did do (although it's hard to tell whether he in fact did accelerate afterward, given the distance in the video.) What he did may not have been a safe thing to do, but if I were a judge and he stood before me and claimed he thought it was the least unsafe thing to do in that moment, I would quite probably give him the benefit of the doubt and accept his rationale.
A much more reasonable interpretation of the video. However, I can conceive of no way that hitting, tapping, or using the brakes at all will prevent a possible collision. All that will do is bring the tailgater even closer than they were already. The only solution is to keep going and move over at the first opportunity. It doesn't take much to speed up a couple of mph to get to a safe place to move over. However, I don't think that would have been required here. Until that driver hit his brakes, the tailgater was 100% in the wrong. When he chose to hit his brakes (a review shows it was more than a tap), he caused an accident that would never have happened otherwise. There were no objects, animals, cars, anything in front of him. He assumed a portion of the liability by hitting the brakes for no reason. I can not give him the benefit of the doubt. If there were something in front, then I could do so. Seeing how he could have crashed into innocent drivers, both to the right and going the other way, makes me even less inclined to do so.
The argument that brakechecking the tailgater was a danger to innocent drivers is a good one, and in fact the only worthwhile argument on that side of the entire debate. The argument that it created a danger for the tailgater is meaningless as far as I'm concerned; if he'd gone into a bridge abutment, I wouldn't have lost a minute of sleep over it, because he'd have had nobody to blame but himself.
Fine don't care about the tailgater, but as you agree it could cause problems that affect innocent people that happened to unluckily be right there at that moment and THAT ALONE should be reason enough to NEVER brake check no matter how justified you feel it is. There's already enough bad drivers and accidents that happen on the roads daily, why add to that problem by doing something that is completely preventable and IS A CHOICE that you make that could potentially harm or even kill other people? So even if you don't give one crap about the tailgater's life, at least think about how your actions might affect the innocent out there.
Quote:
This is not about the tailgater being a "douchebag." It's about him being a menace to the life of every driver in that area, driving in an extremely aggressive and dangerous manner and deliberately placing the lives of innocent people at risk. The danger he created is not a "minor incident" at all; he was an extreme danger, and the driver in front had no safe space to "move aside." Nor would he have had for at least several seconds, unless something about the traffic pattern in that zone suddenly and drastically changed.
The road ahead was only completely clear if the driver had sped up, and if he was already going what he felt to be the maximum safe speed, that would have constituted and unsafe act on his part as well. And no, pulling into the adjacent lane just 2 or 3 car lengths ahead of another vehicle was not "PLENTY of space" at all. It was, again, an unsafe act, endangering the innocent driver of a car that was not doing anything wrong (although the smart and considerate thing for that driver to have done in this instance would have been to slow down and create space for the tailgater to go around the car whose rear bumper he was climbing.)
So - again, the tailgater (and nobody but the tailgater) singlehandedly created a situation in which the driver ahead of him had no safe choices. Some of the other choices available to him might have been smarter unsafe choices (I'll certainly give you that), but the suggestion that the brakechecking driver had safe alternatives available to him is not necessarily borne out by the video.
Not every person who drives fast is a danger to the public or is an aggressive driver and in fact those who drive slow or don't know the rules of the road can be just as much of a danger.
In the video right at the beginning you see the silver van pass the semi and then signal and move into the right lane. That's what the brake checker SHOULD'VE DONE if it felt the SUV behind them was coming too close to his vehicle. And again I ask you to rewatch the video and pause at 0:30. Right then, you can CLEARLY SEE the silver van is far out in front and the SUV that just merged onto the highway is AT LEAST 1-2 car lengths behind the tailgater. This means that the brake checker had TONS OF SPACE to signal and then move into the right lane without any problems whatsoever.
If that person cannot maneuver their car into that big a space without any difficulties, then that person is a BAD DRIVER that shouldn't be on the road. All they had to do was signal, check their blindspot and change lanes. Done and done. The SUV that merged onto the highway wasn't accelerating fast enough to be of any danger to either of those two cars in the left lane, so the way was COMPLETELY CLEAR for the brake checker to change lanes IF THEY WANTED TO. I don't know how you can't see this when its plainly obvious in the video. They had the option to change lanes but chose to brake instead and cause the tailgater to spin out and become a potential danger to drivers on the opposite side coming the other way. The tailgater and brake checker both share blame for creating this unneccesary mess.
Quote:
The tailgating driver first appeared in the video at 16 seconds, and the driver in front of him brakechecked 14 seconds later, at the 30 second mark. The tailgater appeared to be closing the distance the entire time, and seems to have sped up and even more rapidly closed on the driver in front just in the last few seconds. At that point, the driver in front may have legitimately feared he was about to be rearended, and made a split-second decision in reaction to that. If I had been in his place, and come to that conclusion, I may very well have made the same split-second decision. Driving a Subaru, I don't have the horsepower to crack the throttle open and jump out of the way of someone who is closing that fast from such a short distance.
It's quite possible that in that situation, my only two choices (in the amount of time with which I had to work) would have been to brakecheck him or risk letting him rearend me. I may very well have chosen to back him off a bit by tapping the brakes, and immediately accelerating to put some more space between us, which is actually what it looks like the driver in the video really did do (although it's hard to tell whether he in fact did accelerate afterward, given the distance in the video.) What he did may not have been a safe thing to do, but if I were a judge and he stood before me and claimed he thought it was the least unsafe thing to do in that moment, I would quite probably give him the benefit of the doubt and accept his rationale.
If you're in fear about being rearened, then WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU BRAKE?? That doesn't make sense?!?!?!! That's just INCREASING your chances of being rearended because the car behind you is forced to immediately react to your dumbass decision and do it quickly before he hits you.
The smart and most logical decision in this situation where someone is riding your bumping indicating they want to pass you is to simply switch lanes and LET THEM PASS. Even if the tailgater is in a hurry to get by you, if you signal with your lights that you're intending to move to the right for them, almost everyone will wait and give you the extra seconds you need to change lanes. Few people when they see you signal that you're moving for them are going to get any angrier because they see that you got their message and are intending to make way for them.
Also its been discussed numerous times before about the rules of the road and just plain common courtesy that if you're on the highway or a street and you're not passing any cars or have no intention to drive fast, then you should be in the rightmost lane and out of the way.
There are many kinds of drivers on the roads and everyone needs to share obviously which is why we have rules that can accommodate everyone. If you're the kind of person that likes to drive at the speed limit or even slower, then stay in the right lane. If you're the kind of person that likes to drive faster where possible, then that's what the left lane is for. So if that brake checking SUV wanted to go slower or at the speed limit, then they should've just signalled and moved over. Again BOTH are wrong and share the blame.
Watched the video. There was no reason for that guy to brake. Especially on a long flat STRAIGHT roadway where you could see for miles. Not only did he CAUSE the accident the guy could of swerved not oncoming traffic and killed other innocent people. True the tailgater was wrong but the brake check guy CAUSED the wreck and is fully at fault. Should be prosecuted IMO.
Here is the thing. In this life you are gonna deal with Aholes. ALL the BC driver had to do was simply move over and let the other guy pass. But he had to "teach him a lesson". Brake checking is NEVER a justifiable tactic.
It's far easier to just move over. Ive been tailgated at 65-70 mph and I can move over just fine. I've been tailgated on winding mountain roads. And I can still pull over and let traffic oass
Fine don't care about the tailgater, but as you agree it could cause problems that affect innocent people that happened to unluckily be right there at that moment and THAT ALONE should be reason enough to NEVER brake check no matter how justified you feel it is. There's already enough bad drivers and accidents that happen on the roads daily, why add to that problem by doing something that is completely preventable and IS A CHOICE that you make that could potentially harm or even kill other people? So even if you don't give one crap about the tailgater's life, at least think about how your actions might affect the innocent out there.
Not every person who drives fast is a danger to the public or is an aggressive driver and in fact those who drive slow or don't know the rules of the road can be just as much of a danger.
In the video right at the beginning you see the silver van pass the semi and then signal and move into the right lane. That's what the brake checker SHOULD'VE DONE if it felt the SUV behind them was coming too close to his vehicle. And again I ask you to rewatch the video and pause at 0:30. Right then, you can CLEARLY SEE the silver van is far out in front and the SUV that just merged onto the highway is AT LEAST 1-2 car lengths behind the tailgater. This means that the brake checker had TONS OF SPACE to signal and then move into the right lane without any problems whatsoever.
If that person cannot maneuver their car into that big a space without any difficulties, then that person is a BAD DRIVER that shouldn't be on the road. All they had to do was signal, check their blindspot and change lanes. Done and done. The SUV that merged onto the highway wasn't accelerating fast enough to be of any danger to either of those two cars in the left lane, so the way was COMPLETELY CLEAR for the brake checker to change lanes IF THEY WANTED TO. I don't know how you can't see this when its plainly obvious in the video. They had the option to change lanes but chose to brake instead and cause the tailgater to spin out and become a potential danger to drivers on the opposite side coming the other way. The tailgater and brake checker both share blame for creating this unneccesary mess.
If you're in fear about being rearened, then WHY THE HELL WOULD YOU BRAKE?? That doesn't make sense?!?!?!! That's just INCREASING your chances of being rearended because the car behind you is forced to immediately react to your dumbass decision and do it quickly before he hits you.
The smart and most logical decision in this situation where someone is riding your bumping indicating they want to pass you is to simply switch lanes and LET THEM PASS. Even if the tailgater is in a hurry to get by you, if you signal with your lights that you're intending to move to the right for them, almost everyone will wait and give you the extra seconds you need to change lanes. Few people when they see you signal that you're moving for them are going to get any angrier because they see that you got their message and are intending to make way for them.
Also its been discussed numerous times before about the rules of the road and just plain common courtesy that if you're on the highway or a street and you're not passing any cars or have no intention to drive fast, then you should be in the rightmost lane and out of the way.
There are many kinds of drivers on the roads and everyone needs to share obviously which is why we have rules that can accommodate everyone. If you're the kind of person that likes to drive at the speed limit or even slower, then stay in the right lane. If you're the kind of person that likes to drive faster where possible, then that's what the left lane is for. So if that brake checking SUV wanted to go slower or at the speed limit, then they should've just signalled and moved over. Again BOTH are wrong and share the blame.
It took quite a while to put together that last post, and now I can't tell whether you chose not to read it, deliberately ignored what I said, or simply couldn't grasp it. Whatever the reason, there's no point in repeating myself. Waste of time and keystrokes.
In the video right at the beginning you see the silver van pass the semi and then signal and move into the right lane. That's what the brake checker SHOULD'VE DONE if it felt the SUV behind them was coming too close to his vehicle. And again I ask you to rewatch the video and pause at 0:30. Right then, you can CLEARLY SEE the silver van is far out in front and the SUV that just merged onto the highway is AT LEAST 1-2 car lengths behind the tailgater. This means that the brake checker had TONS OF SPACE to signal and then move into the right lane without any problems whatsoever.
On a highway 1-2 car length is TONS OF SPACE . I got it.
On a highway 1-2 car length is TONS OF SPACE . I got it.
It was not tons of space, but the space was increasing because he was going faster than the car on the right.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. I got it.
