Meanwhile in montreal...
- Thread starter MMike
- Start date
Damn, that's rough.
Is the 'rear driver always at fault' thing in a rear end collision not such religion in canadia?
I mean at a certain point, you kinda need to look for brake lights. And a harley can stop much quicker than a car.
Is the 'rear driver always at fault' thing in a rear end collision not such religion in canadia?
I mean at a certain point, you kinda need to look for brake lights. And a harley can stop much quicker than a car.
So...how are the ducks ?
Might not have been brake lights as the driver was out of the car and Harley's stop waaaaaay slower than any post 1970's car. The brakes on them especially the older ones seriously suck.
She was stupid. Given...but maybe the biker was driving too fast for conditions? Following too close? Kinda looks to me like a "the dead can do no wrong" case.
So as she was at the scene first..... The retarded leading the blind?
She was stupid. Given...but maybe the biker was driving too fast for conditions? Following too close? Kinda looks to me like a "the dead can do no wrong" case.
No Def not following too close.... she was out of the vehicle well before he ran into her, so more likely inattention IMO.
However as this is the interwebz I feel that I should refrain from commenting like that and restrict myself to the following retort;
How dare you speak ill of the dead you insensitive prick!!!!!!
However as this is the interwebz I feel that I should refrain from commenting like that and restrict myself to the following retort;
How dare you speak ill of the dead you insensitive prick!!!!!!
Yeah...I am a right rat bastard...
Yeah I'm not sure how she is being held 100% responsible. I believe they also determined that the bike was speeding. So it does seem somewhat amiss.
I've got to admit to no small amount of confusion over this story. Maybe she acted stupidly, but is there no onus on the operator of the motorcycle in this case?
Story also says eyewitnesses saw the harley rider throw up the WTF hand gesture. I feel band for the daughter, but dude sounds like a ****ing moron.
Other vehicles avoided collision, dude has time to give petulant reaction, still manages to kill himself and daughter. Woman was a moron for stopping in a lane.
Other vehicles avoided collision, dude has time to give petulant reaction, still manages to kill himself and daughter. Woman was a moron for stopping in a lane.
no howard the duck no care
Multi point failure for sure...
The witness said no hazards stopped ON THE HIGHWAY. Yes, the bike should have seen the car, but still. Had she pulled to the side to wrangle the ducks, the bike might have hit her instead saving the 2 riders.
Quack....quack....quack....QUACK...QUACK....QUACK!!
Sorry, if you rear-end someone stopped in your lane, you were traveling too fast, or following the person in front of you too quickly, or both. I've gotten rear-ended while stopped for construction, and I've *almost* gotten rear-ended multiple times on the highway for congestion... I have ZERO sympathy for the idiot motorcyclist who was (apparently) both speeding *and* tailgating the car in front of him. It's just too bad he had to take his daughter out with him when he went.
at the risk of being indelicate: was it, though? my take: she was likely receiving most of her riding instruction from this fool, and perhaps it would just be a matter of time where she herself would have inflicted tragedy upon herself & others.
i choose to see the silver lining: there's somebody on the market, and grieving. unscabbard your sword & grab a sixer of labatts!
I admire your consistency
http://www.ridemonkey.com/forums/showthread.php?t=252705&p=3986723&viewfull=1#post3986723
1) The deceased were riding Harleys.
2) They hit a vehicle which had stopped for long enough for the driver to disembark.
Darwin was well served; criminal negligence my ass.
2) They hit a vehicle which had stopped for long enough for the driver to disembark.
Darwin was well served; criminal negligence my ass.
Still no news on the ducks ?
