Agressive driving

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Insurance companies go based off the police report and 100% of the time the cops are going to cite the person in the back who is following way too closely. Even if you have a dash cam video all it’s going to show is you tailgating the driver in front of you.

I wouldn’t brake check anyone in my safe, modern Euro SUV (let alone a 15yo Camry like the PP), but you tailgaters who think the cops are going to do some CSI-worthy accident reconstruction are in for a rude awakening.

If you're going the speed limit and keeping acceptable following distance, you will still hit the car in front of you if they slam their brakes hard for no reason.

You don't need CSI accident reconstruction to see that the person in front was driving dangerously, and then it's a question of whether it was a deliberate attempt to defraud or they are "just" a totally incompetent driver.

Insurance companies love dashcam footage and will absolutely accept it if you have it.

I worked for State Farm as a claims investigator.

If you hit someone, you're at fault. Period. Whether they stomped on their brakes intentionally or not. You are responsible for NOT hitting them from behind, regardless of what they do or how fast they stop. If you can't stop in time, that's because you didn't leave enough distance. Period. Done.

What if someone cuts into your safe space and then brakes?

Why are you looking for free money? If you cut someone off, it is your fault. Not the PP you are responding to, but the insurance companies are NOT stupid.

........of course, you probably don't even have insurance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Is aggressive driving (cutting lanes with no signal, not respecting speed limit, going through red lights, merging recklessly, parking arrogantly, blocking exits, etc.) reflective of high concentration of narcissistic personalities in DC metro area?

I think so. It never ceases to amaze me how many a-hole drivers seem to think that where they're going is more important than others'. Every day on 495 getting to Tysons my blood boils - we're all just trying to get to work, people! I also live next to a soccer field and can pick out who will turn into the fields based on how crazy they were driving that direction. It's usually moms/dads driving 5 kids in a minivan.

People are ALWAYS in a rush and traffic around here is ALWAYS bad so people think they need to drive aggressively to get to where they're going as quickly as possible. I get it, it's super frustrating, but there's no excuse for being a dick. People let it affect them entirely too much, I used to let it ruin my morning, but now I just sit back, listen to a podcast, and wish for the day I can move out of here.

[Anonymous]

This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

I agree. But don't think that "brake checking" is ever a good idea. If you kill someone, and the authorities find out what happened, you could be cited or found criminally liable. I don't think you want that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

LAWLZ

Pro-tip: Move over, and let people pass you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

LAWLZ

Pro-tip: Move over, and let people pass you.

+1

What an ass.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

I agree. But don't think that "brake checking" is ever a good idea. If you kill someone, and the authorities find out what happened, you could be cited or found criminally liable. I don't think you want that.

To add: the authorities have more measures in place to help them find out what really happened, so it is never a good idea to "brake check". OP/PP seems overzealous about resorting to this hostile method of "policing" the roads. OP/PP you are not the police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

Op here - I was taught that one car length is safe distance. Would you advise more than that in this narcissistic area?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

Op here - I was taught that one car length is safe distance. Would you advise more than that in this narcissistic area?

Totally wrong. 70mph and 1 car length? No. I usually hear 1 car length per 10 mph of speed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

Op here - I was taught that one car length is safe distance. Would you advise more than that in this narcissistic area?

Totally wrong. 70mph and 1 car length? No. I usually hear 1 car length per 10 mph of speed.

For the idiots, that's 7 car lengths if you're driving 70 mph.

[Anonymous]

1 car length is *way* too short. 3 seconds at the very least.

Radar cruise in both of our cars (Lexus and Range Rover) keeps ~100-160ft following distance, and that's for a system that can react almost instantly. Any closer and you are taking a needless risk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

Op here - I was taught that one car length is safe distance. Would you advise more than that in this narcissistic area?

Well yeah as we have learned, there are many drivers like PP who try to stage accidents for free money. Gross.

[Anonymous]

Such behavior on roads is a really bad phenomenon and unfortunately and surprisingly it's hard to deal with. In such situations, it's better to get an auto insurance to prevent costs that can be caused by possible damage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Insurance companies go based off the police report and 100% of the time the cops are going to cite the person in the back who is following way too closely. Even if you have a dash cam video all it’s going to show is you tailgating the driver in front of you.

I wouldn’t brake check anyone in my safe, modern Euro SUV (let alone a 15yo Camry like the PP), but you tailgaters who think the cops are going to do some CSI-worthy accident reconstruction are in for a rude awakening.

If you're going the speed limit and keeping acceptable following distance, you will still hit the car in front of you if they slam their brakes hard for no reason.

You don't need CSI accident reconstruction to see that the person in front was driving dangerously, and then it's a question of whether it was a deliberate attempt to defraud or they are "just" a totally incompetent driver.

Insurance companies love dashcam footage and will absolutely accept it if you have it.

I thought I saw a deer running into my path so I hit my brakes negates any claim of fraud.

This. Or any number of "reasons", real or made up, will excuse the brake tap. Sorry, it just will. The Dashcam will only show that you were following too close. It likely will not reflect the reason (dear, squirrel, etc.) that the person hit the brakes. The cops will cite the follower. I"m not excusing it or advocating it. And I've certainly not done it, but you are kidding yourself if you think anyone other than the tail gate will be cited here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This thread is yet another funny example of how aggressive drivers (tailgaters) get outraged when they are responded to with aggression (brake-checking).

They're basically school yard bullies crying to the teacher when their victim strikes back, lolz!


Seriously though, it's amazing the lengths they'll go to and the logic they'll twist to justify their own reckless behavior (tailgating) to make it the other person's fault when they crash into them. It's sheer lunacy. As if they have a right to be a jerk, but get outraged when someone is a jerk back to them. Fascinating....



Pro-tip - you cannot rear-end someone if you leave adequate following distance and pay attention - no matter HOW hard they hit their brakes! They could come to a screeching halt in front of you, and you'd STILL be able to stop in time, IF you weren't tailgating them.

LAWLZ

Pro-tip: Move over, and let people pass you.

+1

What an ass.

+1