• Frank's Lesson's Contest

    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
  • Having trouble using the site?

    Contact support

Maggie’s Motivational Pic Thread v2.0 - - New Rules - See Post #1

1728715766834.png
 


Just to bring it back again

Bikes in the road are annoying. That’s all there is to it….

The issue is, people don’t have the legal right to interfere with them while they’re on the road because that’s where they’re supposed to be. I’m pretty sure where I live, that person committed several particular crimes.

The first, of course, being that it doesn’t matter how you hit the person, you hit the person on a bike. Doesn’t matter if you’re right or wrong, now you got 12 points on your license, a suspended license for 1 to 5 years, and with the video, probably list of other charges.

…and, if you suffer from an attitude problem and don’t wait for the police, that’s a hit-and-run. Now you’re never seeing your drivers license again (5-10years).

All because you couldn’t play nice on the road…
 
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.
 
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.

So if I pay for a licence, registration, insurance etc I am automatically at fault??

The guy who pays nothing automatically wins???
 
So if I pay for a licence, registration, insurance etc I am automatically at fault??

The guy who pays nothing automatically wins???
I didn't say it fair; Most states if you hit a pedestrian or a bike, you're screwed. Regardless of the circumstances.

My old man hit an old lady crossing the street in the middle of the night, wearing black, and killed her.

The law makes him at fault regardless... instant 10 points and there is no appealing it.

There were no road lights, he was coming around the corner while doing the speed limit. she was DRT. He's at fault legally.
 
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.
They didn't make that Craftsman 6200 garage door opener until 2001. 🤡🤣
 
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.
In NY a bicyclist is considered a vehicle and is subject to the same traffic laws, something that most of the spandex wearing
assholes cant seem to comprehend.
 
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.
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
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.
 
Last edited:
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 issues
 
  • Like
Reactions: clcustom1911
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.

The bicyclist should be charged with Darwinism in the second degree.
 
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.
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.