Anonymous wrote:I don't get where you get disadvantaged minority from? And why would that be relevant? People are passing judgment based on his prior record. Let's pray that it wasn't due to his poor driving.

Anonymous wrote:The car has to have some recording sensors, so I think the speed and braking info will come out eventually, but even if he was going a little fast, he is a youth, he is part of a disadvantaged minority, the people that died were turning left and had an absolute duty to YIELD. So really the poor youth is the victim here. I wouldn't be surprised if he could successfully sue the estate of the deceased. It's a tragedy for all, but lets all pray for this poor youth. He shouldn't have to put up with this scrutiny and speculation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The car has to have some recording sensors, so I think the speed and braking info will come out eventually, but even if he was going a little fast, he is a youth, he is part of a disadvantaged minority, the people that died were turning left and had an absolute duty to YIELD. So really the poor youth is the victim here. I wouldn't be surprised if he could successfully sue the estate of the deceased. It's a tragedy for all, but lets all pray for this poor youth. He shouldn't have to put up with this scrutiny and speculation.

I know this is a serious conversation but I couldn't help but read this entire paragraph in Joe Pesci's 'my cousin vinny' post. Who says youth like that over and over?

Anonymous wrote:The car has to have some recording sensors, so I think the speed and braking info will come out eventually, but even if he was going a little fast, he is a youth, he is part of a disadvantaged minority, the people that died were turning left and had an absolute duty to YIELD. So really the poor youth is the victim here. I wouldn't be surprised if he could successfully sue the estate of the deceased. It's a tragedy for all, but lets all pray for this poor youth. He shouldn't have to put up with this scrutiny and speculation.

Anonymous wrote:The car has to have some recording sensors, so I think the speed and braking info will come out eventually, but even if he was going a little fast, he is a youth, he is part of a disadvantaged minority, the people that died were turning left and had an absolute duty to YIELD. So really the poor youth is the victim here. I wouldn't be surprised if he could successfully sue the estate of the deceased. It's a tragedy for all, but lets all pray for this poor youth. He shouldn't have to put up with this scrutiny and speculation.

Anonymous wrote:The car has to have some recording sensors, so I think the speed and braking info will come out eventually, but even if he was going a little fast, he is a youth, he is part of a disadvantaged minority, the people that died were turning left and had an absolute duty to YIELD. So really the poor youth is the victim here. I wouldn't be surprised if he could successfully sue the estate of the deceased. It's a tragedy for all, but lets all pray for this poor youth. He shouldn't have to put up with this scrutiny and speculation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's go back to the new traffic light - which I'm really happy about as this is a commonly used dangerous intersection.

Someone posted that lights cause more accidents - tell me why?

I understand that the ppl that don't obey the rules will continue doing so, but for people like the dad, who's trying to figure out the right time to turn, don't traffic lights improve their safety by giving clear consistent directions on when it's safe to go in any particular direction?

Lights cause rear end accidents because they interrupt the flow of traffic.

No, traffic signals don't cause rear-end crashes. Rear-end crashes are caused by tailgaters who disregard traffic signals and expect other people to do so as well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm literally hitting my head against the wall. First of all, her family is a family of doctors - don't you think ONE of them has notified the insurance company of the event? Second, don't you think ONE of them will think to pay the next premium? Third, there is usually a 30 day grace period by law. Last, it's really nobody's business.

Between this and the person in the political thread who intended to vote in BOTH the democratic and republican primaries, and had NO CLUE that wasn't allowed.....

Where do you get that they're a family of doctors?

Not PP but I'm assuming there are people here who know the family.

I imagine they can handle things. The Volt driver and his Neurologist brother where partners in a management firm that ran a large scale medical clinic... https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2000/02/21/when-a-health-firm-gets-sick-and-dies/d9ed489b-6377-4fc1-9bd3-bbab705c4c97/

The Volt driver isn't mentioned at all in this article.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another terrible accident on outbound River this morning. This is the second bad accident (i.e. requiring jaws of life) I've passed in just over two weeks, not having witnessed the fatal accident earlier this week. What is going on lately?!

The problem with River Road west of the Westbard area is that it's engineered for speed - that is, for driving higher than the posted speed. That fact, the wide median separating the travel lanes and little commercial activity, make River seem more like a rural highway than an arterial road through a densely populated area. East of Westbard cars don't speed to the same extent. MD DOT and the County need to do a thorough engineering assessment of River on how to lower drivers' perceptions of the appropriate speed.

It's a state road, so MD SHA needs to do that; the county has no jurisdiction. Other than that, I agree completely. In fact, MD SHA needs to do the same for ALL of the state roads in the county.

What? East of Westbard the speed limit is lower. It is not a perception thing. It is a more densely populated and commercial area.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let's go back to the new traffic light - which I'm really happy about as this is a commonly used dangerous intersection.

Someone posted that lights cause more accidents - tell me why?

I understand that the ppl that don't obey the rules will continue doing so, but for people like the dad, who's trying to figure out the right time to turn, don't traffic lights improve their safety by giving clear consistent directions on when it's safe to go in any particular direction?

Lights cause rear end accidents because they interrupt the flow of traffic.

Anonymous wrote:Let's go back to the new traffic light - which I'm really happy about as this is a commonly used dangerous intersection.

Someone posted that lights cause more accidents - tell me why?

I understand that the ppl that don't obey the rules will continue doing so, but for people like the dad, who's trying to figure out the right time to turn, don't traffic lights improve their safety by giving clear consistent directions on when it's safe to go in any particular direction?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Another terrible accident on outbound River this morning. This is the second bad accident (i.e. requiring jaws of life) I've passed in just over two weeks, not having witnessed the fatal accident earlier this week. What is going on lately?!

The problem with River Road west of the Westbard area is that it's engineered for speed - that is, for driving higher than the posted speed. That fact, the wide median separating the travel lanes and little commercial activity, make River seem more like a rural highway than an arterial road through a densely populated area. East of Westbard cars don't speed to the same extent. MD DOT and the County need to do a thorough engineering assessment of River on how to lower drivers' perceptions of the appropriate speed.

It's a state road, so MD SHA needs to do that; the county has no jurisdiction. Other than that, I agree completely. In fact, MD SHA needs to do the same for ALL of the state roads in the county.