Should I report this driver to ICBC/RCMP?

[LemonH2O]

I was told by an adjustor a few years back when I got rear ended:

Rule of thumb: If you rear end someone, you were too close to begin with at the speed which you were travelling at, which led to inadequet braking distance, period. That's pretty much it as far as I was told.

[slammer111]

^ you got it. I just love watching how ppl blame the car in front after they pile into them. Yeah it's their fault I got too close officer.. Idiots.

Rear-enders are probably THE SINGLE MOST AVOIDABLE type of accident. People are stupid.

[Noir]

Originally Posted by !LittleDragon

That's why I said better safe than sorry, you never know what can happen. Guy in front could plow into a stopped semi which would stop him instantly leaving you with only one car length to stop. The 2 second rule isn't just for stopping distance, it's to give you time to react to the situation as well.

1 car length is acceptable if you're going under 10kph. At 40kph in rainy weather, that's really pushing it.

Originally Posted by SlySi

Doesnt matter.

I was involved in an accident 3 years ago.
There were 2 cars in front of me. A car cut off the first car. He slammed on his brakes.
Car #2 hit car #1 and I hit car #2.

The loser that caused the accident by cutting the first car off took off. I dont even think he knew what he caused.

Everybody involved in the accident was at fault. Apparently we were too close to each other.

So it doesnt matter about when the car in front of you stopped.
If you hit them. Its your fault for being too close.
Simple as that.


So I asked the question to ICBC.
Does that mean if I slam on the brakes "for no reason", and a car collides with me. The car behind me is at fault?
The answer from ICBC was. "yes"

Originally Posted by PrincessPeiPei

I was told by an adjustor a few years back when I got rear ended:

Rule of thumb: If you rear end someone, you were too close to begin with at the speed which you were travelling at, which led to inadequet braking distance, period. That's pretty much it as far as I was told.

Granted. And I guarantee you I'm very well aware of it. But let's put practice into practicality now.

Rush hour times, Rush hour volume (which the OP found himself in), keep more than 1 car length space (more or less) ahead of you and many other vehicles would be more than happy to occupy what space you've left vacant for yourself, automatically negating it.

Like the speedlimit, there are time that following the Letter-of-the-law just isn't practical.

[slammer111]

Originally Posted by Noir

Granted. And I guarantee you I'm very well aware of it. But let's put practice into practicality now.

Rush hour times, Rush hour volume, keep more than 1 car length space (more or less) ahead of you and many other vehicles would be more than happy to occupy what space you've afforded yourself, automatically negating it.

Like the speedlimit, despite sometimes following the Letter-of-the-law just isn't practical.

Sure, but also don't expect any sympathy if you're found at fault for rear-ending someone in such a setting.

[Noir]

Originally Posted by slammer111

Sure, but also don't expect any sympathy if you're found at fault for rear-ending someone in such a setting.

Sure, but people shouldn't also act like they're not guilty of the exact same crime they would otherwise commit themselves.

[E=mc²]

Originally Posted by PrincessPeiPei

I was told by an adjustor a few years back when I got rear ended:

Rule of thumb: If you rear end someone, you were too close to begin with at the speed which you were travelling at, which led to inadequet braking distance, period. That's pretty much it as far as I was told.

Originally Posted by slammer111

^ you got it. I just love watching how ppl blame the car in front after they pile into them. Yeah it's their fault I got too close officer.. Idiots.

Rear-enders are probably THE SINGLE MOST AVOIDABLE type of accident. People are stupid.

WORD

I leave a 2 second distance 95% of the time. During the 5% when I don't, if I rear-end someone, I'd be pissed at MYSELF, not the guy in front.

Originally Posted by Noir

Like the speedlimit, there are time that following the Letter-of-the-law just isn't practical.

Tell that to the "slower traffic keep right wannabe police" on this forum who expect everyone in front to move over to the right even when both lanes are full of traffic, but not stop and go, in the city. You should remember the thread.

[NSX]

It was Micheal Scofield.

[!LittleDragon]

Originally Posted by wouwou

I know what you are trying to get at, but we should all understand that if the car in front is about to plow into a stopped semi, we can see it from a mile away.

lol... I would sure hope so... Anyways, I didn't mean for this thread to turn into one preaching about the 2 second rule as I don't always follow it myself. I'm just trying to say that 1 car length in the rain @ 40kph is close enough for the guy to feel he's being tailgated and start brake checking you to say stay back.

[Noir]

Originally Posted by MXQBLGH

WORD

I leave a 2 second distance 95% of the time. During the 5% when I don't, if I rear-end someone, I'd be pissed at MYSELF, not the guy in front.



Tell that to the "slower traffic keep right wannabe police" on this forum who expect everyone in front to move over to the right even when both lanes are full of traffic, but not stop and go, in the city. You should remember the thread.

A valid argument can always be made for both sides of the spectrum when people use extreme and specific examples to propagate their point.

Seriously, driving is just common sense. Following the Driver's Handbook to the letter does not make you a great driver. But being smart and experienced does.

[iamed]

Originally Posted by wouwou

I was accelerating when he abruptly stopped.

Try that next time in the rain yourself and see if it is retarded. Oh and do it when there is nothing in front of you, just in case.

Leave yourself more room to brake in the rain? 1 car length isnt a hell of a lot but its your choice to be nailing his ass in the rain. He probably thought you were tailgating him so brake checked you to give you a scare. If you're really that pissed then give him the highbeams or the honk.

[E=mc²]

Originally Posted by Noir

A valid argument can always be made for both sides of the spectrum when people use extreme and specific examples to propagate their point.

Seriously, driving is just common sense. Following the Driver's Handbook to the letter does not make you a great driver. But being smart and experienced does.

I agree with your points, believe me.
I only brought that up because you mentioned practicality. You're perfectly right that it's not practical to follow the law all the time. I just found it amusing that in that left lane thread in fight club (the one before BNR32 made his) ppl didnt seem to agree to this and think "gtfo" is the answer to everything despite other situations of impracticality being presented.

(note I live in a building with 3 other people so I was pretty much there when the thread was made + I had input) but this isn't about me siding with anyone because that can be considered biased. Merely pointing out ppl can't read and choose to ignore the OP's points, gang up on him, and even accusing him of something he didn't do (usually by 600+ posts people).

Adon's recent thread about ppl parking in front of his house was a perfect example of that. lol

[billboa]

oh man dont be such a lil girl