Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
We want to see your skills! Post a video between now and November 1st showing what you've learned from Frank's lessons and 3 people will be selected to win a free shirt. Good luck everyone!
Create a channel Learn more
Just to bring it back again
Just to bring it back again
It really doesn’t matter… Regardless of who’s at fault the SUV hit the person. At that point it no longer matters who you think is at fault from a criminal standpoint.Was that you on the bike or in the truck????
It really doesn’t matter… Regardless of who’s at fault the SUV hit the person. At that point it no longer matters who you think is at fault from a criminal standpoint.
Yeah, in a civil court for a lawsuit that’s a different story… but criminally, most motor vehicle laws in most states: The vehicle is at fault.
Just to bring it back again
Used to be on the bike when younger..now prob in the truck driving my kids somewhere lolWas that you on the bike or in the truck????
I didn't say it fair; Most states if you hit a pedestrian or a bike, you're screwed. Regardless of the circumstances.So if I pay for a licence, registration, insurance etc I am automatically at fault??
The guy who pays nothing automatically wins???
They didn't make that Craftsman 6200 garage door opener until 2001.View attachment 8521755
So....when did cameras in 1975 add the date of the photo to the negative? To be in color, that date stamp would have to be captured through the lens and onto the film (think of the wavelength of that color). My guess is it was a digital camera (with option to overlay date set to "on") with the date set wrong and the photographer and young lady were trying to recreate a "vintage" photo. The grainy-ness can be created/added by using a high ISO setting in a dark setting, like a garage...
Discuss.
In NY a bicyclist is considered a vehicle and is subject to the same traffic laws, something that most of the spandex wearingIt really doesn’t matter… Regardless of who’s at fault the SUV hit the person. At that point it no longer matters who you think is at fault from a criminal standpoint.
Yeah, in a civil court for a lawsuit that’s a different story… but criminally, most motor vehicle laws in most states: The vehicle is at fault.
I’ve been waiting for a Garage Door Opener Savant to identify the make, model and vintage of the opener. This site has a subject matter expert on everything.They didn't make that Craftsman 6200 garage door opener until 2001.
He made some poor choices out of hubris.Regardless of fault, the rider was an idiot.
According to every level of collision investigation across the US....It really doesn’t matter… Regardless of who’s at fault the SUV hit the person. At that point it no longer matters who you think is at fault from a criminal standpoint.
Yeah, in a civil court for a lawsuit that’s a different story… but criminally, most motor vehicle laws in most states: The vehicle is at fault.
I'm not arguing. You're correct. The big issue ends up being how most State's laws are structured. Especially in the Northeast where I grew up... Many of States, most, if a car hits a bicyclist... or, especially, a pedestrian, they get at least one ticket and it's got all of your points.According to every level of collision investigation across the US....
Criminal proceedings against anyone involved in a vehicular collision go off of the "primary collision factor" or PCF. There could be multiple things that went wrong in a collision, but there's 1 involved party which did the *one thing* which, if not done, would have avoided the collision.
In this dick face bicyclists case... yes, the vehicle was crowding the bicycle father to the right, not cool, I get it...
.... then the bicyclist's inner 5 year-old came out and he drifted left (likely purposely) in front of that 5000-6000 point vehicle way too close (potentially unsafe lane change and without proper signal). Then BikeDick (purposely?) slowed down to clearly an unsafe-for-given-conditions speed on a green light, causing the vehicle he cut off just a couple seconds earlier, to not have enough time or space to see/react to...thus the bicyclist is likely at fault based on my view of the incident.
Would a prosecutor bring charges if he was a most likely cause of his own demise? Doubt it, but crazier things have happened.
Also if there's a vehicle left of suv cyclist is pushing driver into the other lane possibly causing more issuesAccording to every level of collision investigation across the US....
Criminal proceedings against anyone involved in a vehicular collision go off of the "primary collision factor" or PCF. There could be multiple things that went wrong in a collision, but there's 1 involved party which did the *one thing* which, if not done, would have avoided the collision.
In this dick face bicyclists case... yes, the vehicle was crowding the bicycle father to the right, not cool, I get it...
.... then the bicyclist's inner 5 year-old came out and he drifted left (likely purposely) in front of that 5000-6000 point vehicle way too close (potentially unsafe lane change and without proper signal). Then BikeDick (purposely?) slowed down to clearly an unsafe-for-given-conditions speed on a green light, causing the vehicle he cut off just a couple seconds earlier, to not have enough time or space to see/react to...thus the bicyclist is likely at fault based on my view of the incident.
Would a prosecutor bring charges if he was a most likely cause of his own demise? Doubt it, but crazier things have happened.
According to every level of collision investigation across the US....
Criminal proceedings against anyone involved in a vehicular collision go off of the "primary collision factor" or PCF. There could be multiple things that went wrong in a collision, but there's 1 involved party which did the *one thing* which, if not done, would have avoided the collision.
In this dick face bicyclists case... yes, the vehicle was crowding the bicycle father to the right, not cool, I get it...
.... then the bicyclist's inner 5 year-old came out and he drifted left (likely purposely) in front of that 5000-6000 point vehicle way too close (potentially unsafe lane change and without proper signal). Then BikeDick (purposely?) slowed down to clearly an unsafe-for-given-conditions speed on a green light, causing the vehicle he cut off just a couple seconds earlier, to not have enough time or space to see/react to...thus the bicyclist is likely at fault based on my view of the incident.
Would a prosecutor bring charges if he was a most likely cause of his own demise? Doubt it, but crazier things have happened.
That's likely a thing given the traffic conditions, but we can't see it on the video.Also if there's a vehicle left of suv cyclist is pushing driver into the other lane possibly causing more issues
That's a 1/2 ton.1972 GMC K2500
And yes that's on my property, driveway through the woods then the dick tree as you get to my house.
Word to the wise though. I made that up.I
I’ve been waiting for a Garage Door Opener Savant to identify the make, model and vintage of the opener. This site has a subject matter expert on everything.
I'm not arguing. You're correct. The big issue ends up being how most State's laws are structured. Especially in the Northeast where I grew up... Many of States, most, car hit a bicyclist... or, especially, a pedestrian, the get at least one ticket and it's got all of your points.
Beautiful but a century or two to build and thousands of lives lost building it.That's likely a thing given the traffic conditions, but we can't see it on the video.
Rules:
Based basilica in Poland
View attachment 8522655
Having spent 30 years doing nothing but deal with accidents, accident reconstruction, collision theory, advanced vehicle systems and tort law, I have never heard the phrase “primary collision factor” or PCF. The term used in the industry is “proximate cause”. The “one thing” you mention is the “doctrine of last clear chance”, in other words who had the last clear opportunity to avoid the collision. Many people mix criminal intent or action with civil liability. Many law enforcement officer have no clue what happened and base their reports or citations on what people say rather than physical evidence and people will lie when the truth will help them. I would think in cases where a full on accident reconstruction was done 50% of the police reports were completely or partially inaccurate. As police departments are groomed through political hiring practices this is trending towards many more inaccurate police reports.According to every level of collision investigation across the US....
Criminal proceedings against anyone involved in a vehicular collision go off of the "primary collision factor" or PCF. There could be multiple things that went wrong in a collision, but there's 1 involved party which did the *one thing* which, if not done, would have avoided the collision.
In this dick face bicyclists case... yes, the vehicle was crowding the bicycle father to the right, not cool, I get it...
.... then the bicyclist's inner 5 year-old came out and he drifted left (likely purposely) in front of that 5000-6000 pound vehicle way too close (potentially unsafe lane change and without proper signal). Then BikeDick (purposely?) slowed down to clearly an unsafe-for-given-conditions speed on a green light, causing the vehicle he cut off just a couple seconds earlier, to not have enough time or space to see/react to...thus the bicyclist is likely at fault based on my view of the incident.
Would a prosecutor bring charges if he was a most likely cause of his own demise? Doubt it, but crazier things have happened.
Brains, tits, ass, and a God given vagina.
Just to bring it back again