This is what we're up against...

[Scruit]

Spoke with a guy today about an accident his daughter was in, he was asking me if there's any way to defend liability.   I read the police report - simple accident, she pulled out from a stop sign into the path of a motorcycle.  She got a FTOTCD/stop-sign ticket and he got a ride to the hospital.  Simple enough, right?   He argued the bike was speeding.

 

I told him he was going to lose unless he could *prove* the bike was traveling so fast that it was not visible when she pulled out and it came into view only after she started her turn.

 

He said; "The bike was speeding."   I asked him how he knew that.  he said; "It's a motorcycle - they all speed all the time."   He was serious.

 

I tried to talk him through it logically, arguing that he was not there and that the bike would have to have been doing 200mph to be out of sight of the stop sign at the moment the car set off and still hit the car.  I jokingly said; "200mph is pretty fast.  Was the guy killed?"  His response; "I wish he had been."  And he was serious.   He went on to argue that he once saw a bike speeding around a roundabout, and that "they all do it".  

 

I read him an excerpt from the police report:  "Unit 1 driver stated she did not see the bike and that the accident was all her fault." 

 

 

I hope this is not a common opinion from cagers. 

 

[Tpoppa]

Stupid reached epidemic status years ago.  It's everywhere.

[jbot]

Idiocracy was not a movie, it was an empirically accurate projection.

[Scruit]

Idiocracy was not a movie, it was an empirically accurate projection.

 

Someone just told me to watch that.  Gotta look it up.

[Scruit]

I brought up streetview for the intersection. 1200 feet of visibility.  For the bike to be out of view when she set off he'd have to be traveling at ~200mph if it took her 4 seconds he claimed it took her to travel the 15 feet to the impact point.  If it took her a more reasonable 2 seconds then he's have to be doing ~400 mph.

 

He's still convinced the bike was out of sight when she set off.  Math and logic be damned,

Edited November 4, 2013 by Scruit

[John]

what was his response when you read him the excerpt from the  report where she stated she was at fault?

[ScubaCinci]

All I can do is shake my head

[Casper]

Makes you sick. 

[magley64]

I fully believe that she did not "see" the motorcycle. It's not that it was out of sight, but that she was not actively looking for a motorcycle, and her brain simply confirmed that there were no cars coming...

 

It's a relatively common phenomenon. Your brain simply ignores whatever it deems irrelevant. 

[magley64]

there is also M.I.B

 

 

Look at the moving diagram below. You see three yellow spots on the outer limits, in the center is a green blinking dot and around it are blue crosses turning. Not exactly a situation you’ll find on the road, but it’s just to illustrate the MIB point (image driving a car on a country road with trees lined on both sides and the yellow dots are motorcycles). If you now stare at the green blinking dot, you’ll suddenly see the yellow dots disappear and reappear. There’s no rhyme or reason behind the timing, it happens at different times for different people. Have look:

 

 

Edited November 4, 2013 by magley64

[Tpoppa]

 

It's a relatively common phenomenon. Your brain simply ignores whatever it deems irrelevant. 

 

Pardon...did you say something?

 

[magley64]

I've almost pulled out in front of motorcycles. I always look. I ride myself. Sometimes, you just don't see them. That's not an excuse, but it is a reality.

 

This...

 

I don't ride like I'm invisible because people are idiots (though they usually are) but because sometimes people really don't see you. Their brains may be preoccupied thinking about their kid who they are meeting at the hospital, or thinking about how  they are going to explain to their wife that they will be struggling until they find their next job. People are human, they make mistakes, even smart ones.

[jbot]

they are chicken fuckers, is what you meant, chicken fucker.

[magley64]

quiet radio

[redbarron77]

I guess the only "defense" against this is to have proof of your speed, driving pattern, etc.

 

Having a camera is probably the best solution, hence all the "Bad Russian Driver" clips.

 

Since Scruit started this conversation, what is the "Best-Bang-for-your-Buck" kind of setup?
 

[Pokey]

SMIDSY......."sorry mate I didn't see you". Very real the way the mind works, as long as the driver is not texting or talking on their cell phone.

[C-bus]

Loud pipes save lives

[ReconRat]

Simple answer. Half the people on the roadway don't have 20/20 vision. Or worse, barely acceptable vision.

Also throw in a good percent poor depth perception.

Now toss in people that don't wear their glasses when they should.

 

So.... entirely possible that a person "did not see the motorcycle".

Just realize where that responsibility actually resides.

 

A forgotten percentage. Similar to percent without insurance, or without driver's license, or intoxicated.

[Dying Shadow]

I've seen them move people around on the vision test from machine to machine till they get passed hell they did it for my great grandma so she could pass and she's damm near blind in her right eye.

[ReconRat]

I guess the only "defense" against this is to have proof of your speed, driving pattern, etc.

 

Having a camera is probably the best solution, hence all the "Bad Russian Driver" clips.

 

Since Scruit started this conversation, what is the "Best-Bang-for-your-Buck" kind of setup?

 

I have several mapping apps on my Droid that will record position, time, road speed, etc.

I often find one of them on after a reboot, and I forgot they would start up that way.

Road speed typically averages less than what you thought you might have been doing.

 

edit: if doing 20 over, it will clearly show over the limit though.

Edited November 5, 2013 by ReconRat

[ReconRat]

I've seen them move people around on the vision test from machine to machine till they get passed hell they did it for my great grandma so she could pass and she's damm near blind in her right eye.

Yeah, I remember when there was no basic test for depth perception. Even then, without depth perception, people would not elect to drive where possible. Too risky. Times change, people risk everything.

[2talltim]

I've seen them move people around on the vision test from machine to machine till they get passed hell they did it for my great grandma so she could pass and she's damm near blind in her right eye.

Hell my last test in July I knew I could not pass without having corrective lenses. I told the woman that. She insisted I try, so I totally guessed and she said "see you passed, you never know till you try" I was totally guessing I couldn't make out the first letter.

[Dying Shadow]

I figured they pass everyone pass/fail just so they get the $$ from renewing there license.

[Kmanlyst]

And for this reason I always start the satellite gps on my phone before I move that logs my speed and keeps it logged unless I delete it.

[Scruit]

I guess the only "defense" against this is to have proof of your speed, driving pattern, etc.

 

Having a camera is probably the best solution, hence all the "Bad Russian Driver" clips.

 

Since Scruit started this conversation, what is the "Best-Bang-for-your-Buck" kind of setup?

 

 

 

Front and rear camera are "Orange menu" GS1000 cameras at $120 each.  The interior facing camera cost about $80 and will record in case of theft or break-in.   The power controller (to allow the cameras to run while the engine is off but also prevent the cameras running the battery flat) was about $20.  The switchbox that flipped to the backup camera was $12.  Took a few hours to get it all wired up factory quality running behind carpets (removed the seats and interior trim to run the wires.  The cameras have GPS and a G-force sensor.  Time/Date/Speed is imprinted permanently on the video image and there is also a gps/gforce data file tied with each video file that you can use the supplied software to overlay your speed, g-force graphs and video image on google maps.  This is black-box level evidence.  If you are not at fault, this will save your butt.  Conversely, if you ARE at fault and the video is used then you have zero defense.

 

Video quality from the front-facing camera (switch to 1080p fullscreen)

 

 

 

The very minimum I would recommend to anyone is to simply get a front-facing GS1000 "Orange Menu" (there are different clones with blue and grey menus that are not as good video quality) and plug it into your cig lighter.  $120 for the camera, $30 for the class10 32GB micro sd.  So for $150 you are covered if there is ever question about your speed, lane position, color of traffic light etc.

 

My informal research shows the most common causes of accidents being ruled "fault undetermined" (or even being ruled 100% the fault of the innocent driver) are:

 - Disputes over the color of the traffic light.  (Was it yellow or red?  Both cars claim green etc)

 - Disputes over which vehicle left its lane (when vehicles in two adjacent lanes sideswipe each other. 

 

Less common are cases where:

  - The location of the accident is disputed (because the at-fault driver drove over a painted gore/solid line and claims the accident happened further down the road where that maneuver would have been legal)

 - A multiple rear-ender where the middle cars try to deny driving into the car in front of it.  (instead they claim they were "pushed" into the car in front, unfairly transferring liability for the damage it did by rear-ending the car in front of it to the car behind it)

 - A rear-ender where the car at the back claims the car in front reversed into them

 

 

 

The new setup video references an old camera system that I just removed - it was an Aver EB1304MOB 4cannel CIF resolution (320x240) that was the size of a VCR and designed to be installed in a bus so you can see why 1920x1080 is insanely better.

Edited November 6, 2013 by Scruit