Street Racers Beware
30-May-2006, 09:54 PM
#101
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 354
Originally posted by Team Rukus
if they dont know how to operate a machine properly then they shouldnt be starting it in the first place.
if they dont know how to operate a machine properly then they shouldnt be starting it in the first place.
That's exactly what I was thinking about the two street racers.
30-May-2006, 09:58 PM
#102
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Moon
Posts: 8,921
lol them tooo
31-May-2006, 01:52 AM
#103
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 1,381
lol jay..
31-May-2006, 01:53 AM
#104
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Mississauga
Posts: 1,381
Originally posted by Team Rukus
So objects moving closer to you at a faster speed is not predictable? Your saying if you cars were comming fast at you...you wouldnt be able to tell the outcome of this? What do u think they are going to do? drive as fast as possible and then stop right infront of you? LOL.
So objects moving closer to you at a faster speed is not predictable? Your saying if you cars were comming fast at you...you wouldnt be able to tell the outcome of this? What do u think they are going to do? drive as fast as possible and then stop right infront of you? LOL.
LMFAO
31-May-2006, 02:33 AM
#105
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 354
Originally posted by Team Rukus
And the part about the couple having absolutely no blame is you just being an ignorant person. simple as that.
And the part about the couple having absolutely no blame is you just being an ignorant person. simple as that.
There are many studies backing this up. Go do the research, and then come back and blame the victim again if you still feel you must.
31-May-2006, 01:21 PM
#107
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Moon
Posts: 8,921
Originally posted by marker
What's ignorant is blaming the victims for not recognizing that a car was doing twice the speed limit. Most people do not encounter that on a regular basis and thus would have little or no sphere of reference by which to ascertain the speed of the approaching car, especially at night when the only thing they have to work with is headlight glare in the distance.
There are many studies backing this up. Go do the research, and then come back and blame the victim again if you still feel you must.
What's ignorant is blaming the victims for not recognizing that a car was doing twice the speed limit. Most people do not encounter that on a regular basis and thus would have little or no sphere of reference by which to ascertain the speed of the approaching car, especially at night when the only thing they have to work with is headlight glare in the distance.
There are many studies backing this up. Go do the research, and then come back and blame the victim again if you still feel you must.
it doesnt matter if 90 percent of the people cant do something or dont do something when they are driving. ITS THE FUKKING LAW that they should be doing it. If they choose not to obay it then they should be prepared for the outcome aswell.
and driving a car is NEVER a predictable venture. Each time the car is started and then shut off at the end of the trip it was different. it doesnt matter if you take the same route to work for 10 years in a row or 10 days in a row NONE of the days will be the same whether it be from the traffic on the road to the conditions of your car to the way you are physically and emotionally.
31-May-2006, 01:32 PM
#108
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 354
Originally posted by Team Rukus
dude seriously how hard is it to get this through your thick head.
it doesnt matter if 90 percent of the people cant do something or dont do something when they are driving. ITS THE FUKKING LAW that they should be doing it. If they choose not to obay it then they should be prepared for the outcome aswell.
dude seriously how hard is it to get this through your thick head.
it doesnt matter if 90 percent of the people cant do something or dont do something when they are driving. ITS THE FUKKING LAW that they should be doing it. If they choose not to obay it then they should be prepared for the outcome aswell.
NOBODY should expect or be prepared for an outcome of death because they were unable to properly assess the approach speed of anothe vehicle doing twice the speed limit. The bad act here is not the turn, but the extremely excessive rate of speed by the idiot behind the other wheel.
The law does not demand the impossible out of drivers. It does not demand that they be able to recognize and/or react to extreme driving speeds and behaviour by others on the road. It's a bonus if they can, but the greater onus is on drivers to operate within reasonable expectations.
I showed you one piece of Ontario law outlining exactly that. Yet you still can't seem to get that through YOUR thick head.
But still, you reacted as I was sure you would, by blaming the victim yet again. Very good. You must be practicing your own potential future defense.
31-May-2006, 01:54 PM
#109
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Moon
Posts: 8,921
seriously why am i even bothering with you?
like i said I just hope i dont see you on the road and you crash and state you cant see me in your circle of love.
like i said I just hope i dont see you on the road and you crash and state you cant see me in your circle of love.
31-May-2006, 02:04 PM
#110
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 354
Originally posted by Team Rukus
seriously why am i even bothering with you?
like i said I just hope i dont see you on the road and you crash and state you cant see me in your circle of love.
seriously why am i even bothering with you?
like i said I just hope i dont see you on the road and you crash and state you cant see me in your circle of love.
If you're from the same driving school of thought as those two Honda drivers involved in that crash, trust me, you do not want to come across me on the road.
31-May-2006, 02:07 PM
#111
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Moon
Posts: 8,921
yea cuz chances are i would have to expect a moron behind the wheel in the middle of the night with no traffic insight while i am racing right?
to bad i wouldnt be doing stupidness like this.
to bad i wouldnt be doing stupidness like this.
31-May-2006, 02:09 PM
#112
Guest
Posts: n/a
I think this is getting a little beyond discussing each other's views.
Thread closed.
Thread closed.
31-May-2006, 04:19 PM
#113
I get to put my two cents in a closed thread 
marker is absolutely right on the money with this one...
Judging by the distance of the vehicles from the intersection in question, a reasonable person has every right to expect that they could clear the intersection prior to the arrival of the oncoming traffic. Had the suspect cars been travelling at the legal speed limit of that particular road, the victim's car making the left would have been clear of the intersection and there would have been no impact.
A car travelling at 150km/hr covers 2.5 km/minute
That is nearly 1/2 a km in 10 seconds, can you judge the speed of a car 1/2 km away?? Would you turn left if there was a car 1/2 km away from you?? Everyone who thinks the victims here hold some fault should really take the time to see how far 1/2 km is, and see how far vehicles are from them when they make left turns. I can tell you I'd never be able to leave my house if I had to wait for cars to be 1/2 km away for me to turn.
When you drive look at the oncoming vehicles, and try to see if you can tell how fast they are going. (I'm assuming both the suspects and the victims had a green light, so they had to be travelling in opposite directions)
We could also measure the intersection to calculate the time (in seconds) it takes to cross the traffic (remember the victims car would have been either stopped prior to the turn to a maximum of 20 km/hr.
marker is absolutely right on the money with this one...
Judging by the distance of the vehicles from the intersection in question, a reasonable person has every right to expect that they could clear the intersection prior to the arrival of the oncoming traffic. Had the suspect cars been travelling at the legal speed limit of that particular road, the victim's car making the left would have been clear of the intersection and there would have been no impact.
A car travelling at 150km/hr covers 2.5 km/minute
That is nearly 1/2 a km in 10 seconds, can you judge the speed of a car 1/2 km away?? Would you turn left if there was a car 1/2 km away from you?? Everyone who thinks the victims here hold some fault should really take the time to see how far 1/2 km is, and see how far vehicles are from them when they make left turns. I can tell you I'd never be able to leave my house if I had to wait for cars to be 1/2 km away for me to turn.
When you drive look at the oncoming vehicles, and try to see if you can tell how fast they are going. (I'm assuming both the suspects and the victims had a green light, so they had to be travelling in opposite directions)
We could also measure the intersection to calculate the time (in seconds) it takes to cross the traffic (remember the victims car would have been either stopped prior to the turn to a maximum of 20 km/hr.
31-May-2006, 05:04 PM
#114
OK now I'm flustered so I'm going to ramble on this subject.
When you are driving your car, are you watching the vehicles going in the opposite direction at all times?? As you arrive at your turn do you just check the distance of the cars you are wishing to cross the path of (remember 10 seconds = 1/2 km) or do you wait to see the rate of their travel along the road?? While you are moving to your turn (still heading in the opposite direction of the other vehicles) how easy is it to see how fast they are moving??
Personally I check the distance, apply it to the speed limit of the road, conditions of the road (and weather) and make my turn based on those conditions. Cars travelling twice the speed limit are not normal street driving conditions.
Quite honestly we are not talking about people here who sat at an interestion for several minutes to assess the cars engaged in unlawful activity. Are we to expect ourselves as reasonable people to do this? How would you feel if your Insurance company expected you to do this, or you are deemed partially at fault? Speed limits, traffic lights, ect. are there to aid in the flow of traffic...if we were expected to not be able to rely on them in our daily driving, then road travel would be damn near impossible.
When you are driving your car, are you watching the vehicles going in the opposite direction at all times?? As you arrive at your turn do you just check the distance of the cars you are wishing to cross the path of (remember 10 seconds = 1/2 km) or do you wait to see the rate of their travel along the road?? While you are moving to your turn (still heading in the opposite direction of the other vehicles) how easy is it to see how fast they are moving??
Personally I check the distance, apply it to the speed limit of the road, conditions of the road (and weather) and make my turn based on those conditions. Cars travelling twice the speed limit are not normal street driving conditions.
Quite honestly we are not talking about people here who sat at an interestion for several minutes to assess the cars engaged in unlawful activity. Are we to expect ourselves as reasonable people to do this? How would you feel if your Insurance company expected you to do this, or you are deemed partially at fault? Speed limits, traffic lights, ect. are there to aid in the flow of traffic...if we were expected to not be able to rely on them in our daily driving, then road travel would be damn near impossible.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
