chikoo

^ I understand that argument, but in no way is it a flawless argument. Too many holes. There is a reason why I have managed to stay out of accidents so far...I do read the traffic like you do. I anticipate the moves one would make, be it it smart or stupid. This was a game of chicken, and the Subaru driver lost.

mjeds

IMO both are idiots. Subaru for tailgating and attempting to pass on the right, and the Pilot for acting like he owns the f'in road, blocking and brake checking the Subaru instead of simply getting out of the way.

it makes no difference if the Pilot was "driving fast enough" the lane on the right was open, the Subaru was driving faster than the Pilot, so the Pilot driver is obligated to move his *** over and get out of the way of the faster moving traffic.

This is why there is now a trend in the USA of states passing laws that make what the Pilot driver did illegal and at fault. Multiple states have passed laws in recent years making it illegal to drive in the left lane and not move over if faster traffic is approaching you. Unless you are a cop in a marked vehicle it is not your job to regulate another drivers speed, move your *** out of the way and let the faster car pass, if that car is breaking the speed laws, that is their problem, not yours.


and FWIW, I don't mess with people like the Subaru driver, if traffic is flowing at speed and some dill hole comes up behind me and wants to ride my ***, I get out of the way, regardless of what lane I am in. I have no time in my life for dumbasses and their road rage.

My0gr81

In most jurisdiction, there are specific instances where flashing the headlights (high beams included) or blowing the horn is allowed. Passing a left lane hogger (douche bag) is not it.

I have read enough of the highway traffic acts in Canada and some of the individual State's Traffic Code to know that there are common elements that are very similar when it comes to lane usage patterns and safety and signaling equipment usage, which horns and headlight fall into.

chikoo

Are you stating that you would know the reason why the Honda Pilot applied the brakes? Do you have a blackbox in the passenger cabin of the Honda Pilot that is recording all interactions?

Coleroad

I think everyone can agree following to close and brake checking is inappropriate road rage behavior. So don't be one of those idiots, and contribute to this hazardous action. Story is there will always be one of those types on the road. Don't participate in it and life is less stressful and safer.

My0gr81

Here , Here. Hoping everyone sees the reasonableness of this statement.

Unfortunately, we have some members here, either as shock jocks, or truly defending the actions of the Pilot driver as being justified.

mmarshall

Well, this is a public discussion-forum, where members are free to post their opinions. That does not make people shock-jocks or unreasonable, just because you personally may not happen to agree with their opinion. While there are some opinions here thaty agree with you, a number of others do, in fact, feel that the Honda driver basically did the right thing, though perhaps in a little too abrupt a manner. Impatience, taking chances, and/or excessive speed (which the Subaru driver clearly demonstrated) has led to a lot of accidents.....incuding this one.

My0gr81

Well, then, there would have been no issue and no need to rationalize the Pilot driver's action as "too abrupt" if he/ she would have obeyed the law and driven on the proper side side of the road. There would have been no impatience, taking chances from the Subaru driver. Speeding would have been his only infraction, and best left to the proper authorities to deal with. That is what law and order stand for. But as I said before, with if's and but's we could put Paris in a bottle.

Every one has a right to their opinion, but, one's opinion is a testament to their character. Defending the illegal and dangerous actions of someone, speaks to that character.

chikoo

LeX2K

I never said anything about what you are supposed to do or not do. Obviously riding the persons bumper is extremely stupid, in any situation you put yourself in a position of lowest risk the driver did the opposite.

Sulu

I still believe that the driver of the Pilot should have pulled back to the right as soon as possible, knowing that there is an impatient idiot on her tail, but then, I really do not know the situation that she was in.

Did she believe that she was in a damned-if-she-does-and-damned-if-she-doesn't situation where, regardless of what she decided to do, the driver of the Subaru was going to make a reckless move -- stay in the left lane and the Subaru impatiently tries to pass (unsafely) on the right, or try to squeeze into a tight spot in the right lane (perhaps endangering her own life if the right-lane traffic does not let her in) and immediately have the Subaru pull out to pass on the shoulder? In that situation, it may have been safer if she stayed where she was -- she stays safe while letting the Subaru driver kill himself by passing on the right or the left.

EZZ

They should let him pass because the left is for passing. If a car is coming at you in the left, GET OUT OF THE WAY. Left lane loungers are simply the most idiotic rudest pests on the road plain and simple.

mjeds

if you watched the video, it is plain as day that there was no one in front of the Pilot and he/she was brake checking the tailgater. he/she hard braked and then accelerated away. The excuse of a dog in the road or sunlight in their eyes doesn't apply, the video is cut and dry, you can see in front of the Pilot and to the side, there was no reason for the brake check, and I would bet my last dollar any competent investigator would see it the same way.

what is slamming on the brakes is supposed to accomplish? The easy answer is “to get the other car to back off.” But there is an underlying answer that is more important, it is “to scare the other driver into thinking they might rear-end the front car so that they decide to back off.” This is the important distinction. Slamming the brakes is intended to cause fear, fear of a potential accident and possible injury.

The Crime of Assault, in many states, includes any action that is intended to cause fear of immediate harm in the mind of another person. To be found guilty of Assault in this context, the state must prove 4 things:

1. That the front car driver committed an act with the intent to place the driver of the second car in fear of immediate physical harm;
2. That the front car driver had the apparent ability at the time of the action to actually cause physical harm;
3. That the driver of the second car (or any other person in the area) was reasonably put in fear of physical harm; and
4. That the front car driver was not legally justified, or acting in self defense.

(1) You intentionally slammed on your brakes, with the intent to scare the second car into thinking if they don’t slow down there might be an accident – Check;
(2) you are driving a hunk of steel weighing upwards of a ton and if an accident occurs, it is likely to cause at least a minor injury – Check;
(3) someone was actually put in reasonable fear that they might immediately be hurt as a result of your action — Maybe;
(4) there is no legal justification for slamming on your brakes to scare someone – “he was tailgaiting me” is not a valid justification here — so, Check!

So, with 3 of the 4 elements being fairly obvious, as long as there is some proof or good faith belief that someone was actually scared as a result of your actions, you just committed an assault.

That having been said, just because you break a law doesn’t mean you will be charged with one.


Any investigator that watches this particular video will see there was no justification for the brake-check and subsequent accident that occurred. The tailgater is not innocent, but the driver of the Pilot should have simply moved out of the way, the video gives a clear view that the right lane was open and that there was no one in front of the Pilot Driver. it would have taken less effort to move over and let Mr. Speed Racer pass.

and Michigan (where this occurred) has a very distinct law regarding this:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(nlm...me=mcl-257-634

257.634 Driving on right half of roadway; exceptions; driving on roadway having 2 or more lanes for travel in 1 direction; traveling on freeway having 3 or more lanes for travel in same direction; ordinance regulating same subject matter prohibited; violation as civil infraction.

Sec. 634.

(1) Upon each roadway of sufficient width, the driver of a vehicle shall drive the vehicle upon the right half of the roadway, except as follows:

(a) When overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction under the rules governing that movement.

(b) When the right half of a roadway is closed to traffic while under construction or repair or when an obstruction exists making it necessary to drive to the left of the center of the highway. A driver who is driving on the left half of a roadway under this subdivision shall yield the right-of-way to an oncoming vehicle traveling in the proper direction upon the unobstructed portion of the roadway.

(c) When a vehicle operated by a state agency or a local authority or an agent of a state agency or local authority is engaged in work on the roadway.

(d) Upon a roadway divided into 3 marked lanes for traffic under the rules applicable on the roadway.

(2) Upon a roadway having 2 or more lanes for travel in 1 direction, the driver of a vehicle shall drive the vehicle in the extreme right-hand lane available for travel except as otherwise provided in this section. However, the driver of a vehicle may drive the vehicle in any lane lawfully available to traffic moving in the same direction of travel when the lanes are occupied by vehicles moving in substantially continuous lanes of traffic and in any left-hand lane lawfully available to traffic moving in the same direction of travel for a reasonable distance before making a left turn.

(3) This section shall not be construed to prohibit a vehicle traveling in the appropriate direction from traveling in any lane of a freeway having 3 or more lanes for travel in the same direction. However, a city, village, township, or county may not enact an ordinance which regulates the same subject matter as any provision of this subsection. The driver of a truck with a gross weight of more than 10,000 pounds, a truck tractor, or a combination of a vehicle and trailer or semitrailer shall drive the vehicle or combination of vehicles only in either of the 2 lanes farthest to the right, except for a reasonable distance when making a left turn or where a special hazard exists that requires the use of an alternative lane for safety reasons.

(4) A person who violates this section is responsible for a civil infraction.

SNiiP3R

iTrader: (3)

This is how you teach them not to brake check,

litesoarer

Michigan LP# DKQ-5176

Call it in if you disagree with the actions of the Honda driver.