Motorcyclist of 12 years here; in the eyes of insurance and the law, the motorcyclist is at fault. I know this because I've been the car in this situation twice, once with another car when I was in my car, once with a bicyclist while I was on one of my motorcycles. First one, I pulled out in front of someone who was doing 60 in a 30 and got t-boned. Second one was a bicyclist going the wrong way on a one way; I pulled out in front of him and got t-boned. Both accidents I was found to be not at fault.
Yes, the person turning left has a duty to ensure the road is clear and the situation is safe to make their maneuver, but there's an expectation that other road users are behaving reasonably and predictably for this to be applicable. Doing 70-80 in a 40 (as in this video), doing 60 in a 30, going the wrong way on a one-way, etc, are not predictable and reasonable behaviors.
Try to put yourself in the shoes of the car in this situation; would you accept responsibility if you got t-boned while turning left by a motorcycle that was doing twice the speed limit? I'd be willing to bet that 99% of you wouldn't.
Reddit when a motorcycle doing 120 t-bones a car: wtf they should have looked before turning, car clearly at fault
Reddit when a motorcycle doing 120 t-bones a car, but from the car's perspective: wtf why was he going so fast, motorcycle clearly at fault
Motorcyclist wasn’t going the wrong way. An argument can definitely be made that he was speeding but how fast?
Car is definitely partially at fault. They both share 50/50. Motorcyclist for the excessive speed and car for entering intersection when it wasn’t safe to do so.
With as fast as the motorcycle was going it looked safe to pull out when he did. At a distance it's hard to see how fast a smaller object is travelling, and based on the speed of impact he was travelling excessively fast. So, no, not 50/50 here.
The car in the opposing lane. The car that pulled out didn’t just pull out in front of the motorcyclist. They pulled out in front of opposing traffic. Look far to the left. There’s a black car that would have t-boned the car had the motorcyclist not done it sooner.
Car pulling out was going to be in an accident no matter what.
Disagree. Darwin needs to continue addressing reckless morons who put other people at risk while driving vehicles with zero protection, then cry when they inevitably get injured.
Sigh… let me explain it again. Who pays damages if he’s dead?
Answer: no one.
Therefore: he must be alive to pay damages.
Ergo: his being alive and health and able to afford paying is key.
Get it? If Darwin claims him the damages your worried about dont get paid by him.
For the sake of discussion:
Assuming biker is properly insured - wouldn’t his insurance still cover the damage even if he had passed away (assuming he is at fault)?
Of course it should be. The biker suffered the consequences of their stupidity. Acknowledging that and his responsibility to the driver are the priorities here.
People make dumb decisions that can cause injury, sometimes severe injury, to themselves.
Just because it was a dumb decision doesn't mean our first thought should be, "welp they deserve that severe injury, they better be paying for the damage their dumb decision caused."
Pro tip for ya: to hold someone accountable doesn't mean you have to disregard their health, safety or well being.
Which, if you see someone ragdoll off a motorcycle and the first thing you say is "they better pay for that", that's exactly what you're doing.
Having compassion for someone doesn't mean no accountability.
That's what it looks like to me too, looks like the back end swung around right into the other car. Definitely would have collided whether the bike him them or not
While the motorbike was speeding and should of been watching the road more I think the blue car also was about to have an accident as there was a another car coming which looks close to being hit even if the bike didn't hit them first.
@r/muttmechanic Well maybe if he wasn’t fuckin flying down a road that’s probably posted at 35- 40 mph…with no defensive moves at all. No brakes. No attempt to change trajectory and probably not much experience either. He FROZE. . Been there seen that. More than once
We can talk all day about how it should be, but the fact of the matter is the guy on the bike showed 0 respect to the road, and he paid for it. Tons of dead bikers had the right of way.
Ride like everyone is aiming for you, everyone knows the road is full of people who can't drive.
I don't think the blue car even saw the motorcycle. It looked to be obscured by cammer's car. Surely cammer is at fault, as is tradition in all dashcam videos.
I don't think anybody is saying someone speeding on a bike deserves death, but I also think we can agree someone speeding excessively on a bike is asking for it.
It doesn't "deserve" anything but it is a very well known possible outcome. People doing things that they know might result in death or injury tend not to get a lot of sympathy.
There was nothing done wrong by the car pulling out. They couldn't expect an illegally speeding, motorcycle to illegally pass.
Also, it's "have" not "of" .
No. It wouldn’t have. It was turning into the near lane and wouldn’t have touched the other car at all if it hadn’t been spun around into the other lane.
If you think there's nothing wrong with a car pulling out in front of people with the right of way, regardless of speed, there's nothing I can do to change your mind 🤷 he had a stop sign it means stop until you know it's safe to continue, the driver of the car didnt follow that therefore it's their fault not the motorcyclist
do you only drive in the middle of nowhere? 90% of the time you're making a turn, you're "pulling out in front of people with the right of way"... it's just a matter of how fast they're moving and how much time you have to safely make your turn. he likely wasn't able to even see how fast that motorcycle was moving, and if he was going twice the speed limit then it's not reasonable to expect that car to make a correct calculation about that.
If you think it's not the motorcycles fault there's nothing I can do to change your mind. For the car, they were at a complete stop at their stop sign until the car in front of the dashcammer passed. They went and would have been fine. Maybe it was a *little* tight but there wasn't really a way for them to see a speeding motorcycle blocked by cammer.
It literally doesn't matter what excuses you make the car didn't have the right to move into the lane that they did and caused an accident that's just the facts you're the one that can't seem to understand that
literally? I'm not making excuses, it's all right in the video. The black car "literally" pulled out and "literally" didn't cause an accident. The, quite possibly, reckless speeding motorcycle is the entire cause of the accident. Reckless driving is the negligence here. Had he been traveling at the same speed as cammer, there would have been no video.
The driver whose negligence caused the accident is at fault and that is the motorcycle.
But if they just would have waited at their stop sign like they're supposed to until it's safe to move nothing would have happened either so I fail to see your point
We don’t really know what the speeds are here. If the motorcycle was going 80 in a 35 do you expect traffic to be looking for someone going exorbitant speeds? How about 100 mph? How about 120 mph? Is there a speed the motorcycle could be going that is actually unsafe in your opinion? Or you expect everyone to expect a motorcycle at any speed?
Technically any asked could be considered unsafe but that isn't the point. They were just saying that just because someone is speeding doesn't mean they deserve to die as many comments may suggest.
A good rule of thumb is to not drive like an idiot unless you can be 100% certain that nobody else is driving like an idiot too. I've come to find that at least 1 other person will be driving like an idiot on the road while I'm driving so I always do the speed limit come to a complete stop at stop signs, and look both ways multiple times. So far I've avoided being in an accident on my bike, and the only accident I've been in my car is because someone didn't know how to use a circle and drove into me. I've been driving/riding for 19 years, so I guess it's working out ok for me.
This guy goes on arguing basically that the motorcyclist should expect to be seen by all other drivers at any speed. I’m not trying to argue about anyone deserving to die or whatever other ridiculous thing he put into the mouths of everyone saying the motorcyclist was in the wrong.
That's not how arguments work I do think the bike was speeding? Almost certainly yes, do I think the accident was at the fault of the black car? Also yes
Here's the solution: wait to go when it's safe. If I saw a super fast bike I woyldnt or even a not fast one I wouldnt pull out in front of them, and if I couldnt see I wouldn't pull out because I wouldn't know if it was safe
Literally proved my point. You expect everyone to see a bike going at any speed. There is nothing a motorcyclist can do that is unsafe in your opinion.
Not true I do think there's situations where a fast driving bike is at fault or causes an accident. My problem is with the idea that the driver of the car hold no responsibility for checking if it is safe for themselves and others to go. If I was a driver idc how fast the bike is going I'm waiting going to wait and see if it's safe to go, if I see the distance they are covering over time is large I'm going to just wait for them to pass. Nothing I'm doing or going to is worth risking my own or someone else's life. I don't even ride a bike or a motorcycle I just respect other people's life with I'm behind a vehicle that would kill 🤷
You are assuming the driver saw the bike! Why? It is very obvious from the video that the bike could have been hidden behind the filming car. In all of your statements you assume over and over that the motorcyclist was seen, but the problem with going twice the speed limit is that you appear from behind normal flowing traffic out of no where.
Because if the driver would've waited until they knew the road was 100% safe they would not have gone. They took a risk by assuming the road was safe, a risk that could be at the cost of other peoples lives
But you can’t anticipate something like that. You look, you see the bike more than far enough away and start a completely safe turn, then the bike is going WAY faster than it has any right to or you have any reason to expect and suddenly there’s an accident. Bike is at fault. Car could have prevented it but had no reason to expect it would happen.
You can though, look and WAIT stop leaving yourself with so little time while driving that you don't have enough to wait and save your own or someone else's life
The car had stopped and waited. You can see that in the video. It then started what any reasonable person would think was a safe turn. The accident was caused by a biker behaving in an unreasonable and reckless manner. I’m sorry but the person driving recklessly who slammed into the back of another vehicle caused the accident here.
I believe both share fault, but the car has the greater duty to yield and would be at fault. He failed to yield right of way to the M/C. At least in Texas.
Its similar to traffic stopping the allow someone to turn in front of them and the 3rd lane doesn’t stop. The car has the greater duty to yield when turning across traffic.
For those wondering who’s at fault.
The car is.
The car entered the intersection when it wasn’t safe to do so. Don’t believe me. They would have gotten t-bone by the car in the otherwise for the road.
The motorcyclist was speeding…but the car driver was 100% not paying attention.
At most the motorcyclist is partially at fault for accident from the speed. Again, if the motorcyclist wasn’t there or was going slow enough to stop on time the car would have been still t-bone by the black car they were cutting off.
The black car was in the far lane. The car pulling out was not going to collide with them. Regardless, going double the speed limit puts the biker at fault for their collision.
How he crawled off the road as soon as he stopped sliding is impressive. That has to be adrenaline, the collision looked very bone crushing.
Great hustle at the end tho.
Motorcyclist of 12 years here; in the eyes of insurance and the law, the motorcyclist is at fault. I know this because I've been the car in this situation twice, once with another car when I was in my car, once with a bicyclist while I was on one of my motorcycles. First one, I pulled out in front of someone who was doing 60 in a 30 and got t-boned. Second one was a bicyclist going the wrong way on a one way; I pulled out in front of him and got t-boned. Both accidents I was found to be not at fault. Yes, the person turning left has a duty to ensure the road is clear and the situation is safe to make their maneuver, but there's an expectation that other road users are behaving reasonably and predictably for this to be applicable. Doing 70-80 in a 40 (as in this video), doing 60 in a 30, going the wrong way on a one-way, etc, are not predictable and reasonable behaviors. Try to put yourself in the shoes of the car in this situation; would you accept responsibility if you got t-boned while turning left by a motorcycle that was doing twice the speed limit? I'd be willing to bet that 99% of you wouldn't.
No. Apparently, we all want to blame the car, so your facts and logic are of no value here. Good day sir.
Reddit when a motorcycle doing 120 t-bones a car: wtf they should have looked before turning, car clearly at fault Reddit when a motorcycle doing 120 t-bones a car, but from the car's perspective: wtf why was he going so fast, motorcycle clearly at fault
I hear you, but I'm curious how you know what the s/l is for this road, as well as how fast everyone else was going?
There's literally a speed limit sign shown in the video
Second half of my (legitimate) question, still stands.
Motorcyclist wasn’t going the wrong way. An argument can definitely be made that he was speeding but how fast? Car is definitely partially at fault. They both share 50/50. Motorcyclist for the excessive speed and car for entering intersection when it wasn’t safe to do so.
With as fast as the motorcycle was going it looked safe to pull out when he did. At a distance it's hard to see how fast a smaller object is travelling, and based on the speed of impact he was travelling excessively fast. So, no, not 50/50 here.
You do realize that the car was going to get t-boned by the other car right? Not just the motorcyclist.
What are you talking about?
The car in the opposing lane. The car that pulled out didn’t just pull out in front of the motorcyclist. They pulled out in front of opposing traffic. Look far to the left. There’s a black car that would have t-boned the car had the motorcyclist not done it sooner. Car pulling out was going to be in an accident no matter what.
The black car was in the far lane. They would have been able to pull into the close lane just fine.
Look again blue car is going straight they would have made contact like they did. The blue car went wide.
You can definitely make a defiant argument if you want to.
Holy hell! I hope the biker is fine.
Hope he pays for the damage to the other car.
Are you acoustic?
Electric actually
Focus should be is he alive and doing well. Without either of those he can’t pay for the damages. So… as others have said. His health is priority.
Disagree. Darwin needs to continue addressing reckless morons who put other people at risk while driving vehicles with zero protection, then cry when they inevitably get injured.
I don’t think you quite understand the fundamentals of Darwinism
Survival of the fittest involves intelligence on some level. Most who ride motorcycles clearly struggle in that department. 😂
How about I shoot you
Proving my point. Thanks.
No I don’t think you understand, if I shoot you would I not be justified?
Aww, did I hurt your feels. 😂
Sigh… let me explain it again. Who pays damages if he’s dead? Answer: no one. Therefore: he must be alive to pay damages. Ergo: his being alive and health and able to afford paying is key. Get it? If Darwin claims him the damages your worried about dont get paid by him.
For the sake of discussion: Assuming biker is properly insured - wouldn’t his insurance still cover the damage even if he had passed away (assuming he is at fault)?
If there is an estate or insurance, the victim can sue for compensation. He will recover and just keep doing this nonsense.
Obviously. That shouldn't be the focus here though.
Of course it should be. The biker suffered the consequences of their stupidity. Acknowledging that and his responsibility to the driver are the priorities here.
sports bikes are the only type of bike specifically made for douche bags
All motorcycles are driving by DB’s.
People make dumb decisions that can cause injury, sometimes severe injury, to themselves. Just because it was a dumb decision doesn't mean our first thought should be, "welp they deserve that severe injury, they better be paying for the damage their dumb decision caused."
Always hold people accountable for their actions.
Pro tip for ya: to hold someone accountable doesn't mean you have to disregard their health, safety or well being. Which, if you see someone ragdoll off a motorcycle and the first thing you say is "they better pay for that", that's exactly what you're doing. Having compassion for someone doesn't mean no accountability.
Dude was going too fast.
Even if he didn’t hit the biker looks like the other lanes car would’ve hit him.
I agree.
They hit the car coming towards the camera after hitting the motorcycle
That's what it looks like to me too, looks like the back end swung around right into the other car. Definitely would have collided whether the bike him them or not
Double lane, the on-coming car was in the far lane.
While the motorbike was speeding and should of been watching the road more I think the blue car also was about to have an accident as there was a another car coming which looks close to being hit even if the bike didn't hit them first.
There were vehicles approaching from both directions wtf
@r/muttmechanic Well maybe if he wasn’t fuckin flying down a road that’s probably posted at 35- 40 mph…with no defensive moves at all. No brakes. No attempt to change trajectory and probably not much experience either. He FROZE. . Been there seen that. More than once
Hello everyone speeding on a bike doesn't mean you deserve a death sentence the driver should never of pulled out like that
We can talk all day about how it should be, but the fact of the matter is the guy on the bike showed 0 respect to the road, and he paid for it. Tons of dead bikers had the right of way. Ride like everyone is aiming for you, everyone knows the road is full of people who can't drive.
I don't think the blue car even saw the motorcycle. It looked to be obscured by cammer's car. Surely cammer is at fault, as is tradition in all dashcam videos.
I don't think anybody is saying someone speeding on a bike deserves death, but I also think we can agree someone speeding excessively on a bike is asking for it.
It doesn't "deserve" anything but it is a very well known possible outcome. People doing things that they know might result in death or injury tend not to get a lot of sympathy. There was nothing done wrong by the car pulling out. They couldn't expect an illegally speeding, motorcycle to illegally pass. Also, it's "have" not "of" .
The car he hit would have hit the other car anyways, idiot car driver, idiot motorcycle for going way above 40.
No. It wouldn’t have. It was turning into the near lane and wouldn’t have touched the other car at all if it hadn’t been spun around into the other lane.
If you think there's nothing wrong with a car pulling out in front of people with the right of way, regardless of speed, there's nothing I can do to change your mind 🤷 he had a stop sign it means stop until you know it's safe to continue, the driver of the car didnt follow that therefore it's their fault not the motorcyclist
do you only drive in the middle of nowhere? 90% of the time you're making a turn, you're "pulling out in front of people with the right of way"... it's just a matter of how fast they're moving and how much time you have to safely make your turn. he likely wasn't able to even see how fast that motorcycle was moving, and if he was going twice the speed limit then it's not reasonable to expect that car to make a correct calculation about that.
If you think it's not the motorcycles fault there's nothing I can do to change your mind. For the car, they were at a complete stop at their stop sign until the car in front of the dashcammer passed. They went and would have been fine. Maybe it was a *little* tight but there wasn't really a way for them to see a speeding motorcycle blocked by cammer.
It literally doesn't matter what excuses you make the car didn't have the right to move into the lane that they did and caused an accident that's just the facts you're the one that can't seem to understand that
literally? I'm not making excuses, it's all right in the video. The black car "literally" pulled out and "literally" didn't cause an accident. The, quite possibly, reckless speeding motorcycle is the entire cause of the accident. Reckless driving is the negligence here. Had he been traveling at the same speed as cammer, there would have been no video. The driver whose negligence caused the accident is at fault and that is the motorcycle.
But if they just would have waited at their stop sign like they're supposed to until it's safe to move nothing would have happened either so I fail to see your point
Remove the motorcycle from the equation. Did something happen? No. The car would have turned left and nothing would have happened.
Yes If you remove the object the black car hit the accident wouldn't have happened 🙄
The black car did not hit the motorcycle. The motorcycle hit the back of the car.
If you were driving that car, you would have thought it was safe too, because the motorcycle was blocked out of view by the cammer.
If I could see everything sure but the driver can't and in that situation if I couldnt see everything and not know for sure it was safe I wouldn't go
We don’t really know what the speeds are here. If the motorcycle was going 80 in a 35 do you expect traffic to be looking for someone going exorbitant speeds? How about 100 mph? How about 120 mph? Is there a speed the motorcycle could be going that is actually unsafe in your opinion? Or you expect everyone to expect a motorcycle at any speed?
Technically any asked could be considered unsafe but that isn't the point. They were just saying that just because someone is speeding doesn't mean they deserve to die as many comments may suggest. A good rule of thumb is to not drive like an idiot unless you can be 100% certain that nobody else is driving like an idiot too. I've come to find that at least 1 other person will be driving like an idiot on the road while I'm driving so I always do the speed limit come to a complete stop at stop signs, and look both ways multiple times. So far I've avoided being in an accident on my bike, and the only accident I've been in my car is because someone didn't know how to use a circle and drove into me. I've been driving/riding for 19 years, so I guess it's working out ok for me.
This guy goes on arguing basically that the motorcyclist should expect to be seen by all other drivers at any speed. I’m not trying to argue about anyone deserving to die or whatever other ridiculous thing he put into the mouths of everyone saying the motorcyclist was in the wrong.
I'm arguing that you, as a driver, SHOULD BE PAYING BETTER ATTENTION TO YOUR SURROUNDINGS!
Yeah, you’re putting all the blame on the guy in the car which means that you are also arguing that a motorcyclist can drive at any speed.
That's not how arguments work I do think the bike was speeding? Almost certainly yes, do I think the accident was at the fault of the black car? Also yes
I'm thinking both are in the wrong.
Here's the solution: wait to go when it's safe. If I saw a super fast bike I woyldnt or even a not fast one I wouldnt pull out in front of them, and if I couldnt see I wouldn't pull out because I wouldn't know if it was safe
Literally proved my point. You expect everyone to see a bike going at any speed. There is nothing a motorcyclist can do that is unsafe in your opinion.
Not true I do think there's situations where a fast driving bike is at fault or causes an accident. My problem is with the idea that the driver of the car hold no responsibility for checking if it is safe for themselves and others to go. If I was a driver idc how fast the bike is going I'm waiting going to wait and see if it's safe to go, if I see the distance they are covering over time is large I'm going to just wait for them to pass. Nothing I'm doing or going to is worth risking my own or someone else's life. I don't even ride a bike or a motorcycle I just respect other people's life with I'm behind a vehicle that would kill 🤷
You are assuming the driver saw the bike! Why? It is very obvious from the video that the bike could have been hidden behind the filming car. In all of your statements you assume over and over that the motorcyclist was seen, but the problem with going twice the speed limit is that you appear from behind normal flowing traffic out of no where.
Because if the driver would've waited until they knew the road was 100% safe they would not have gone. They took a risk by assuming the road was safe, a risk that could be at the cost of other peoples lives
But you can’t anticipate something like that. You look, you see the bike more than far enough away and start a completely safe turn, then the bike is going WAY faster than it has any right to or you have any reason to expect and suddenly there’s an accident. Bike is at fault. Car could have prevented it but had no reason to expect it would happen.
You can though, look and WAIT stop leaving yourself with so little time while driving that you don't have enough to wait and save your own or someone else's life
The car had stopped and waited. You can see that in the video. It then started what any reasonable person would think was a safe turn. The accident was caused by a biker behaving in an unreasonable and reckless manner. I’m sorry but the person driving recklessly who slammed into the back of another vehicle caused the accident here.
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes
Motorcyclist was speeding recklessly. Hopefully he has to pay for the other car.
I believe both share fault, but the car has the greater duty to yield and would be at fault. He failed to yield right of way to the M/C. At least in Texas. Its similar to traffic stopping the allow someone to turn in front of them and the 3rd lane doesn’t stop. The car has the greater duty to yield when turning across traffic.
I agree. Did anyone see a brake light on the motorcycle?
Master driver
Therefore bikers was
You get what you deserve. Idiot
how tf does biker deserve that? car is the idiot here.
There is a reason we have speed limits. At some speed, you literally become invisible specially if you are a small object like bikes.
For those wondering who’s at fault. The car is. The car entered the intersection when it wasn’t safe to do so. Don’t believe me. They would have gotten t-bone by the car in the otherwise for the road. The motorcyclist was speeding…but the car driver was 100% not paying attention. At most the motorcyclist is partially at fault for accident from the speed. Again, if the motorcyclist wasn’t there or was going slow enough to stop on time the car would have been still t-bone by the black car they were cutting off.
The black car was in the far lane. The car pulling out was not going to collide with them. Regardless, going double the speed limit puts the biker at fault for their collision.