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.
The thing is, the first clear, obvious, indisputably deliberate interaction on the video is by the motorcyclist. Everything else on the video can be argued stemmed from that action.
We don't know what happened before the video started.
The ones with loud pipes and bad attitudes give the good ones bad names. It's like road bikers who are self entitled and ride on packs 3 abreast taking up whole lanes on busier roads. Luckily I live in an area where that's not an issue, but if I frequently came up behind groups of bikers like this, I'd probably just plow my car through them (just kidding.. mental fantasy that would never happen but I like to think about. ) I say this as somebody who himself rides a road bike but am considerate to other drivers because I know I wouldn't want to be held up by groups of people doing half the speed limit. haha.
I'll bet you about 33% of motorcyclists and road bikers are dbags. That still leaves 66% that are not, which is a lot.
Bikes are entitled to the whole lane. Would it be better they hold up 3 lanes because they are allowed to.
Just from what I saw in the video, it appears to me that the car merged over into the left lane before the lanes actually merged. I don't think it was an intentional move to run into the motorcycle but it did cut him off. If this is accurate the guy in the car got what he deserved, maybe he will pay more attention next time and wait to merge. I feel bad for the innocent people that were inadvertently brought into this mess and I think the motorcyclist should have stopped at a minimum to see if those people were ok. But this is all theory, the car and motorcycle could have been at each other for miles and miles. Though this is the whole video I feel like I am watching a video from the evening news where they only show you the parts of the video so they can get you to believe a bias view of the story.
Some states have what's called a "last clear chance" rule. IOW, although one driver might have committed an earlier fault, if it can be determined that the other driver had a "last clear chance" to avoid the accident, he will be considered the one at fault for the accident.
So despite what had happened earlier, the motorcycle driver clearly had a chance to simply stay behind the jerk driver (something I've done many times) and not continue the fight.
My husband (who rides a bike) and I had a rather heated argument about this the other night. He maintains that the car is at fault because he started the whole chain reaction by cutting off the bike. I maintain that the bike is at fault, because he took the law into his hands and kicked the car after a traffic incident.
The bike had every opportunity to drive off. Scream, yell, flip the driver off, get a license number and call the cops - whatever. But the moment he made contact with the car deliberately he became at fault (IMO).
I don't know anything about the driver of the car, but if I, a woman, had done something stupid or illegal while driving (and who hasn't at some point?), and had a guy on a bike chase me down and repeatedly kick my car, I might swerve to get him to stop.
Years ago, I was pushed out of a fast lane on a 70 mph freeway by a car full of teenagers. I had nowhere to go but into the median, where I drove on the grass, hoping I didn't hit any obstructions, until I was able to get back into traffic. I had a choice at that point. I could chase down those teens for their dangerous and illegal action, or let it go. The bike had that same choice.
My husband (who rides a bike) and I had a rather heated argument about this the other night. He maintains that the car is at fault because he started the whole chain reaction by cutting off the bike. I maintain that the bike is at fault, because he took the law into his hands and kicked the car after a traffic incident.
The bike had every opportunity to drive off. Scream, yell, flip the driver off, get a license number and call the cops - whatever. But the moment he made contact with the car deliberately he became at fault (IMO).
I don't know anything about the driver of the car, but if I, a woman, had done something stupid or illegal while driving (and who hasn't at some point?), and had a guy on a bike chase me down and repeatedly kick my car, I might swerve to get him to stop.
Years ago, I was pushed out of a fast lane on a 70 mph freeway by a car full of teenagers. I had nowhere to go but into the median, where I drove on the grass, hoping I didn't hit any obstructions, until I was able to get back into traffic. I had a choice at that point. I could chase down those teens for their dangerous and illegal action, or let it go. The bike had that same choice.
Your husband is the reason many people can't stand motorcyclists. How the hell is it rational to believe that if a car driver makes a mistake while driving that a person on a motorcycle now has the right to intentionally damage their personal property? It is this mentality that directly led to the crash. If the asshat on the bike had not committed a crime by attempting to intentionally damage the car, the crash most likely would not have happened.
I bolded part of your post because it matches up with how I have told my spouse to handle a situation like this. If she makes a mistake and somebody can't contain their road rage and starts chasing her, kicking her car, etc. she should consider that a serious threat to her life and use any and all means to end that threat including shoving some biker into a concrete median.
Your husband is the reason many people can't stand motorcyclists. How the hell is it rational to believe that if a car driver makes a mistake while driving that a person on a motorcycle now has the right to intentionally damage their personal property? It is this mentality that directly led to the crash. If the asshat on the bike had not committed a crime by attempting to intentionally damage the car, the crash most likely would not have happened.
I bolded part of your post because it matches up with how I have told my spouse to handle a situation like this. If she makes a mistake and somebody can't contain their road rage and starts chasing her, kicking her car, etc. she should consider that a serious threat to her life and use any and all means to end that threat including shoving some biker into a concrete median.
My husband wouldn't ever do what this biker did, but his opinion on the incident was surely influenced by the fact that he rides a bike and has crap happen to him all the time. We agreed to disagree :-)
My husband wouldn't ever do what this biker did, but his opinion on the incident was surely influenced by the fact that he rides a bike and has crap happen to him all the time. We agreed to disagree :-)
I have a friend who rides, and he complains all the time too. But we're not the ones getting on a 1000-pound two-wheeler and mixing it up with 4000-pound four-wheelers and more. *shrugs*
So if I accidentally bump someone in a bar/restaurant and they retaliate by shoving me away while calling me an a-hole that gives me the right to try to kill them by slamming a chair over their head? But oh gee I missed and hit someone else, but it's totally the other guys fault, because he shoved me?
But the swerving after the motorcyclist kicked the car happened so quickly, it doesn't seem to me that it was 'retaliation'. It seems like the driver got startled. In addition, at highway speeds, who would swerve like that to 'retaliate' against someone? That would be a death wish. It just doesn't make sense to me.
But at the end of the day, we can speculate as to why the driver lost control. But there is surely no speculation as to the fact that what the motorcyclist did was completely wrong.
If startled, I don't know of anyone who swerves toward a noise or another vehicle. I am of the opinion this was an ongoing incident and the swerve was the last move and based in anger.
As others have said, the poor guy in the white truck was the one I felt sorry for.
"Does the car swerve on purpose to block the motorcyclist, or is that just a startle reaction?
We can’t theorize at this point whether that was intentional or reactionary. I could see it either way."
"Is the motorcyclist guilty of hit and run?
Not necessarily. A lot has to do with what his story is. The right thing to do would be to stop."
I once witnessed an incident on a four lane highway with a large grassy center median, no concrete barriers. I was in the "slow" lane" when a driver two three vehicles ahead of me started to pull left over into the "fast" lane, not seeing a vehicle in his blind spot that was already in the fast lane. The driver attempting the lane change did virtually the same thing the driver of the sedan in the video did. He swerved left (where he was looking when he picked up there was a car in his blind spot), over-corrected right, over-corrected left, miraculously did not hit anyone, and ended up in the median, where he spun 360 degrees and ended up facing the direction he was originally traveling. None of the rest of us drivers had time to react and do anything. We all just kept going.
Having seen that and watched the extended video I am not convinced that what the driver of the automobile did was intentional. I believe the motorcyclist was in the automobile's blind spot, and when the driver saw the cycle (after the kick prompted him to look left) he was startled and steered where he was looking. From the description of the videographer, the cyclist also was in the automobile's blind spot on the right when the incident started, before what was captured on the video.
The cyclist clearly knew he was in the wrong. That's why he kept going and left the scene and has not come forward. His aggression set off the entire chain of events. I have to wonder if this was the first time he pulled the kick-the-car trick, too. It looked practiced. He may not be found if he keeps his mouth shut and does not brag about what he did and no one recognizes his cycle and turns him in. If I were he, I would get a lawyer and go to the police.
We talked about the importance of your eyes and focusing on where you want to go in the last article. There is nothing more essential to great driving, or more basic, than the main concept that the car will go where you’re looking. You don’t steer the car with your hands, you steer with your eyes. If you look where you want to go, with your head and eyes, the rest will follow; you’ll automatically turn the steering wheel in the right direction and the car will travel in that direction. If you continue steering with your eyes, you’ll make the minor adjustments necessary to correct the car’s path, whether the obstacle is moving or your car starts to skid."
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 say this as somebody who himself rides a road bike but am considerate to other drivers because I know I wouldn't want to be held up by groups of people doing half the speed limit. haha.
