Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DP

How do you establish intent without witness or video evidence? If the very first time they hit their brakes to brake check you, you run into them because you were tailgating, good luck proving intent of reckless driving.
Stop advocating for tailgaters. It shows you’re one yourself. Not a good look, dear.

That’s why I said the PP better hope the next person he brake checks doesn’t have a dash cam. Or witnesses. Plenty of people get caught doing it - read the links.

Brake checking is very dangerous and more reckless than tailgating.

I’m advocating for safe driving.

DP

Even if they HAD a dash cam - what would it show? All you’d see was them hitting their brakes and then the crash. They could easily claim they were trying to avoid hitting something in the road up ahead that couldn’t be seen on camera. There’s absolutely no way to prove something wasn’t there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Both brake checking and tailgating are considered to be examples of aggressive or reckless driving.

How do they know it was aggressive driving and not panic braking?

If there was a piece of debris in the road ahead. Or a deer that suddenly appeared on the shoulder. You could claim either of those, or something equally plausible. The dash cam wouldn’t be able to refute it because what you’d claim “it” was wouldn’t be in the camera field of view anyway.


How about YOU stop defending/advocating on behalf of tailgaters?

Having 2 lawsuits for being rear ended is a huge red flag

I wonder if the car insurance company will become suspicious of reckless driving.

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

Ouch! How's your neck and spine?
I got rear ended and it totally messed me up. Sure, i got paid but not sure if it's worth the permanent damage and chronic pain omg

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Both brake checking and tailgating are considered to be examples of aggressive or reckless driving.

How do they know it was aggressive driving and not panic braking?

If there was a piece of debris in the road ahead. Or a deer that suddenly appeared on the shoulder. You could claim either of those, or something equally plausible. The dash cam wouldn’t be able to refute it because what you’d claim “it” was wouldn’t be in the camera field of view anyway.


How about YOU stop defending/advocating on behalf of tailgaters?

Having 2 lawsuits for being rear ended is a huge red flag

This occurs because 1) speed limits are often unrealistically low for conditions, frustrating many drivers who can safely go faster, and 2) some drivers on multilane roads fail to follow the sensible adage that slower drivers should stay to the right, no matter the speed limit. Failing to stay right when one can is merely provocative to others who wish to drive faster but are prevented from doing so by left-lane bandits who are either oblivious or self-righteous about their speed.

OMG can we stop with the brake checking? Don't do it, brag about it, don't do it.

For the OP, were you signaling when you were turning right into your office? If you were, that person behind you should lose their license. If not, you need to communicate better to other drivers what you are doing and why you are slowing down.

Anonymous wrote:DP

How do you establish intent without witness or video evidence? If the very first time they hit their brakes to brake check you, you run into them because you were tailgating, good luck proving intent of reckless driving.
Stop advocating for tailgaters. It shows you’re one yourself. Not a good look, dear.

That’s why I said the PP better hope the next person he brake checks doesn’t have a dash cam. Or witnesses. Plenty of people get caught doing it - read the links.

Brake checking is very dangerous and more reckless than tailgating.

I’m advocating for safe driving.

DP

How do you establish intent without witness or video evidence? If the very first time they hit their brakes to brake check you, you run into them because you were tailgating, good luck proving intent of reckless driving.
Stop advocating for tailgaters. It shows you’re one yourself. Not a good look, dear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Yes, it is illegal. If you intentionally cause an accident there should be consequences.

Please cite where panic braking is illegal.

Any state motor vehicle code will suffice.

Go ahead. Find one.

It falls under reckless driving.

"A "brake check" is when a driver who believes that he or she is being tailgated taps the brakes, hoping to scare the driver into slowing down.

"It's basically road rage," South Carolina Highway Patrol Cpl. Sonny Collins said.

State law would side against brake-checking, according to Collins.

"Simply moving to the right would be appropriate," Collins said. And that applies to either driver: "One driver needs to have the cooler head."

A driver who rides the bumper of the driver ahead of him or her could face a charge of following too closely, he said.

But a driver who brake-checks someone whom he or she believes is following too closely could face an even more serious charge.

Collins referred to South Carolina Uniform Traffic Law Section 56-5-2920, which reads, in part: "Any person who drives any vehicle in such a manner as to indicate either a willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property is guilty of reckless driving."

"When you hit the brakes to cause a reaction in the other driver, it's a willful act, and it shows a 'wanton disregard' for their safety," he said. "That's reckless driving."

A reckless driving ticket means six points on your driver's license plus a fine, he said. A second conviction results in a suspended license, according to the law."

If you find yourself being tailgated by a driver and you can safely move to the right lane, that's the best choice, Collins said.
https://www.wyff4.com/article/brake-checking-in-sc-could-be-costly-mistake/7020765#

https://www.tapinto.net/towns/south-brunswick/sections/police-and-fire/articles/south-brunswick-man-charged-with-reckless-driving-road-rage-caused-numerous-accidents

https://www.kxan.com/news/texas/is-brake-checking-a-tailgater-illegal-in-texas/

https://www.ksnblocal4.com/2023/02/28/lavista-man-gets-jail-fine-alda-road-rage-case/

https://www.wfla.com/news/local-news/lakeland-man-arrested-in-armed-i-4-road-rage-incident/

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a30929221/waymo-self-driving-crash-arrest/

https://wrrv.com/is-it-illegal-to-brake-check-the-driver-behind-you-in-new-york/

https://www.nj.com/union/2020/02/driver-caught-on-video-brake-checking-school-bus-is-charged.html

https://www.ksnblocal4.com/2022/12/14/lavista-man-convicted-alda-road-rage-case/

etc etc

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Yes, it is illegal. If you intentionally cause an accident there should be consequences.

Please cite where panic braking is illegal.

Any state motor vehicle code will suffice.

Go ahead. Find one.

https://www.mcdonaldinjurylaw.com/blog/auto-accident-news/is-brake-checking-illegal-in-virginia/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20brake%20checking%20is%20illegal,with%20a%20reckless%20driving%20charge.

https://www.marylandaccidentlawyerblog.com/is-brake-checking-legal/

DP

I would be highly suspicious of taking legal advice from a law blog that misspelled “Brake” checking at least 6 different times in a single article.

I’m going to assume their practice is about as meticulous as their proofreading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Yes, it is illegal. If you intentionally cause an accident there should be consequences.

Please cite where panic braking is illegal.

Any state motor vehicle code will suffice.

Go ahead. Find one.

https://www.mcdonaldinjurylaw.com/blog/auto-accident-news/is-brake-checking-illegal-in-virginia/#:~:text=Yes%2C%20brake%20checking%20is%20illegal,with%20a%20reckless%20driving%20charge.

https://www.marylandaccidentlawyerblog.com/is-brake-checking-legal/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Yes, it is illegal. If you intentionally cause an accident there should be consequences.

Please cite where panic braking is illegal.

Any state motor vehicle code will suffice.

Go ahead. Find one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Both brake checking and tailgating are considered to be examples of aggressive or reckless driving.

How do they know it was aggressive driving and not panic braking?

If there was a piece of debris in the road ahead. Or a deer that suddenly appeared on the shoulder. You could claim either of those, or something equally plausible. The dash cam wouldn’t be able to refute it because what you’d claim “it” was wouldn’t be in the camera field of view anyway.


How about YOU stop defending/advocating on behalf of tailgaters?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I brake check the hell out of tailgaters. I’ve been hit twice, got settlements both times. If you tailgate me your brakes and your reflexes better be tip top. Otherwise you’ll be paying me. Again.

You better hope the next guy doesn’t have a dash cam.

So reckless.

Why would a dash camera change anything? It would show the at-fault driver was following at an unsafe distance immediately before the crash.

Hitting your brakes isn’t illegal. Running into someone because you were following too closely is.

Yes, it is illegal. If you intentionally cause an accident there should be consequences.

I live near the MD border so I see more examples of terrible MD drivers than VA drivers. But this thread title made me remember when I was driving with a colleague who lives in VA and even though I really try not to remark on other people's driving she was being so insanely aggressive that I finally said "it's not really safe to be this close to the car in front of you" and she told me "safe following distance is a highway concept, you don't have to do that in the city." It was really startling, like she has given this some thought and decided to come as close as possible to ramming the car in front of her because that's how you drive when you get off the highway.