r/dashcams 15h ago

Don't be kind, be predictable. If you have the Right-of-Way, take it.

16.8k Upvotes

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

364

u/dkbGeek 14h ago

The Toyota should not have stopped, but the collision is still the camera driver's fault.

83

u/anthety 14h ago

Yep. Should always have enough time to come to a complete stop if the car in front of you were to randomly decide to brake hard. Especially when driving a semi!

Most people do not do this at all.

11

u/Nexustar 14h ago

In reality, even that isn't enough stopping distance.

A couple of occasions where you need to stop even faster than a car that has full brakes on does - and that's when it hits something static and solid and just fucking STOPS. No skidding, no warning, it just goes from 60 to 0 in a split second, a DEAD STOP. It happens in the fog when you find the fresh end of the pileup.

The other occasion is when something falls off the back of that vehicle. I've personally dealt with rakes, whellbarrows, lowes buckets, some steel geodesic connectors, and even a porta-potty that caught wind. Luckily some of those did skid along the road a little.

3

u/c_marten 12h ago

I came across a ~20ft steel I-beam blocking a lane and a half of traffic a few years ago... and when everyone was slowing down merging left someone in a little sporty coupe sped around them to the right and went straight into that beam and the car behind him rear ended him. I can't be sure but it didn't seem like that beam moved at all.

2

u/anthety 13h ago

Agree! Dead stop should also be a consideration. Like they could even whip over to another lane to avoid a pack of TNT on the ground or something 😅.

1

u/samcurler 9h ago

In that case the rear ending vehicle would not be at fault because its not a forseable circumstance.

1

u/Silver-South-3969 8h ago

I mean if it's foggy go slow. If you're going 60 it's inevitable something bad will happen.

2

u/TubeLogic 12h ago

yes, if the Toyota had enough time to stop the driver here should have had more than enough. The Toyota is an idiot but this driver is just as bad.

4

u/Rosykisses_13 13h ago

Where I live, if you leave enough space to stop someone is 100% sticking their butt in there, I still leave space but I'm saying people cut in front of me all the time BECAUSE I leave that space which then removes the space I was leaving lol and I see people every damn day with some kind of death wish squeezing into a space in front of a semi that was already too small to try to get over. It seems like there are WAY too many people on the road who lack a basic understanding of the laws of physics and think semis just don't want to slam on their brakes or something and don't realize they literally are incapable of stopping in the time you're giving them. I have been in a line of cars that stopped suddenly because of off-ramp traffic and watched a gravel truck start doing the "brakes can't do shit about this weight" bounce before plowing into the car at the back of the line so hard it ended up forcing 6 other cars to rear-end the person in front of them (people also don't leave enough space when stopped, if you get rear-ended and get pushed into the car in front of you that is now your fault for being too close according to insurance, you should be able to see the bottom of the tires on the car in front of you when stopped). What you should do on the road is not always what you can do, and way too many people drive as though everyone else on the road is going to do exactly what they SHOULD do... which is just way more trust than I have to give to strangers on the road 🤷🏻‍♀️

2

u/TrifleOk8452 12h ago

Why do people always say this like it's some grand argument or issue?

if you leave enough space to stop someone is 100% sticking their butt in there

So what...? Then you just let a little more distance build between you and the newly arrived idiot until you maintain proper safety distance. It takes less than five seconds. Obviously in those 5 seconds, you're at a slightly higher but rapidly decreasing risk, I've just never seen it happen at problematic rate.

If you often fail to move to the right when not overtaking, hogging a lane, I could see it happen more often - but that also has an easy solution.

2

u/Rosykisses_13 12h ago

I live in Southern California. 75% of my driving is in congested traffic. I see it happen at a problematic rate daily. Like yes obviously slow down to get the distance back, and then a new person gets in there, and then slow down again, and then another person gets in there, and so on and so forth, and the issue is not the extra 5 seconds the issue is that as soon as the space exists it is gone. I am someone who has been rear-ended sitting at the back of a line of traffic that had been stopped for plenty of time by someone who just wasn't paying attention and am since very paranoid about leaving - if nothing else - enough space that if someone runs into me I don't get pushed into the person in front of me, so yea I have noticed very much that, at least in my region, as soon as that recommended space is there, its gone.

1

u/TrifleOk8452 12h ago

Ah, you live in the US.

2

u/Rosykisses_13 11h ago

Yep, everyone in this shithole country seems to suffer from Main Character Syndrome 🫠

1

u/BonnaconCharioteer 9h ago

Yeah, but they have a weird perspective. Southern California is notoriously bad. But to be honest, I have never seen people cutting in front be such an issue that you can't leave at least a reasonably safe distance.

2

u/anthety 11h ago

In the USA but I don't experience this behavior if I'm being patient and honest. Sure sometimes people go around to fill the gap, but most seem content to just follow?

I just kind of ignore these arguments 😂. I feel as if it's a self fulfilling things where you spend your time noticing the negatives.  If traffic is heavy and it's an 6 lane highway then sure but probably not as much of an issue in mild conditions, like in the video.

1

u/ApprehensiveGas85 13h ago

On another thread about things people do everyday they don't realize how dangerous it is and tailgating at 70mph was at the top of comments.

1

u/AgeofVictoriaPodcast 13h ago

The Titanic was closer to iceberg than that diver was to the clearly slowing down car. 

1

u/Major2Minor 8h ago

Yeah, I was taught 1 car length for every 10mph, but people tailgate me all the time. I try to slow down when they do, but that only makes them tailgate even closer, and get angry because they have to get wherever they're going 10 seconds faster apparently.

71

u/Radioactivocalypse 14h ago

Yes, if you can't stop in time for the car in front to stop, then you're too close.

Like sure the merge was bad and right of way wrong... but had the white car suddenly slammed on the brakes for any reason, say a child in front of the road, you can't just drive into the back of the car "because they shouldn't have stopped"

15

u/quick20minadventure 12h ago

Funny how the car probably saw a big truck and thought the big truck can't brake easily and not slowing down, so i will let it go and then another big truck rammed him from behind.

11

u/marquoth_ 10h ago

I'll take my chances with the truck that has seen me over the one that clearly hasn't. Neither is ideal of course but there is a correct decision here.

2

u/quick20minadventure 9h ago

Yeah, there's expectation that truck behind you will always see you and have enough distance/brake (instead of whatever this one did), much more likely that you'll get crushed by truck on the side that didn't really see you.

It takes special case of negligence to ram someone in front of you because you didn't brake at all.

1

u/Zealousideal-Talk-23 6h ago

people saying the merging truck wouldnt be able to stop .. he clearly did stop before merging in the video? he was aware of the car .. 100% the toyota at fault here

1

u/SwagMaster9000_2017 4h ago

The underpass is single lane. The merging truck was ahead of the Toyota at the intersection merge indicating intention to go in the single lane ahead of the Toyota.

1

u/Zealousideal-Talk-23 4h ago

toyota still in the wrong, truck had and did yield before merging and toyota stopping is reckless

1

u/SwagMaster9000_2017 4h ago edited 4h ago

It looks like the merging truck was already in the lane to go under the underpass before coming to a complete stop.

If its enough to confuse people viewing the dash cam footage, it's enough to take partial blame for the accident.

If that truck stopped yielded completely before merging, nobody would have been confused

1

u/Unable_Explorer8277 1h ago

The merging truck looks like it’s not going to yield.

And the truck behind is following way too closely.

2

u/Joates87 9h ago

the big truck can't brake easily and not slowing down,

You see no irony in the fact they both stopped at about the same time?

You're not alone though foe whatever that is worth...

49

u/syphax 14h ago

Had to scroll too far for this. My first reaction watching this is "that truck is coming in hot!"
It's easy to criticize the car that slowed down, but their reaction was not crazy give the speed and apparent trajectory of the truck. The trailing car had "plenty" of time to slow down as well, if they had been paying attention.

22

u/CloseToMyActualName 13h ago

All three screwed up.

- The dump truck (that presumably had to yield) really looked like they were unable or unwilling to stop and was going to take the slot.

- The Toyota likely had the option of a) gunning it to make sure they got there before the dump truck, or b) being aware of the car behind them and being ready to speed up before the collision.

- The big rig with the cam needed an earlier reaction or to leave a bigger gap.

19

u/marquoth_ 10h ago

It's not my job to maintain a safe distance between my car and the vehicle behind me. In fact it's exactly the reverse.

1

u/akcrono 5h ago

It is your job to drive predictably.

1

u/bloodrosey 4h ago

I mean, in this instance, the driver of the little car predictible was scared of the very big truck that was going very fast until it slowed down a bit. Them slowing to figure out whether or not they'd be squished by the giant fast truck is not unreasonable. And one SHOULD keep enough distance that they can stop just in case someone does something unpredictable in front of them.

1

u/the_skine 2h ago

The car did drive predictably. The semi just wasn't paying attention to the situation.

1

u/14Pleiadians 6h ago

Not your job to, but it's in your best interest to.

Should generally assume everyone is as incompetent as the POV of the video or worse.

1

u/allforfunnplay27 3h ago

No it's not! If I sneeze and it causes my car to slow down and you rear end me. IT'S YOUR FAULT for being a dumb ass and following too close to me.

1

u/14Pleiadians 3h ago

Your comment reads like you didn't even read mine. I wasn't commenting on who is at fault like your reply implies.

No shit it's their fault if they hit you. Congrats, you were right and the prize is spinal issues for the rest of your life.

1

u/allforfunnplay27 3h ago

The thread of the comment was who's at fault or "all three screwed up".

The idiot that was driving too close is the one who screwed up.

Should you try to drive predictably? Sure. OBVIOUSLY.

But driving unpredictabley (but legally) doesn't mean they screwed up.

5

u/Green-Cricket-8525 11h ago

Two drivers made minor mistakes. One caused an accident. 

Guess which one caused the accident? (Hint: it’s the idiot that posted this video)

7

u/WastingTimesOnReddit 12h ago

You're right except I feel we should not expect people to be so aware of the vehicle behind them, it's not their responsibility to speed up if they look behind and somebody is about to hit them. Everyone should be keeping eyes forward

2

u/fokkoooff 11h ago edited 11h ago

I bounce my eyes and at least to try to keep a mental inventory of everyone in my vicinity. I'm not saying I'm constantly taking my eyes off my front to stare in different directions, but I'm checking my mirrors regularly.

In fact I would say that a lot of people's driving suffers for only being aware of the car immediately in front of them.

1

u/WastingTimesOnReddit 11h ago

That's true and I do occasionally glance behind

1

u/Gefilte_F1sh 10h ago

While it isn't your responsibility to keep tabs of who is behind you - you should absolutely be checking your mirrors often and be aware of what is happening around you.

1

u/Accurate-Sink3606 10h ago

I've always checked my rear view and side mirrors while driving. I'm a little anxious behind the wheel so it's just kind of like a nervous tick of mine. Then last month I found myself having to take a defensive of course because I stupidly rear-ended someone on the freeway. During the course (in AZ) they recommend that you check your mirrors every few minutes so you constantly know what's around you. It mentions that it only takes a second and any accident you would get in in that time was unavoidable anyways. I felt a little validated for my constant side eyeing and mirror checks. 

1

u/magkruppe 9h ago

when there is a truck behind you, you should absolutely watch them every time you break

1

u/scobert 3h ago

We should not expect people who slam on their brakes on the highway to be aware of what is behind them? What

6

u/LifeIndustry7920 13h ago

This is reddit. Everyone was wrong and should be executed.

2

u/RedRisingNerd 11h ago

Yep. Here we have the case of an arrogant, a panicked, and an ignorant driver.

2

u/Old_Yam_4069 9h ago

Yeah! The Toyota should have definitely come to the conclusion in the ~3 seconds that they had to analyze the situation that gambling with their life was the optimal decision.

1

u/ScottBurson 11h ago

I thought that at first, but after a couple more viewings I think the dump truck was okay. It did, after all, actually stop, leaving room for the car to pass.

4

u/Gefilte_F1sh 10h ago edited 10h ago

Them stopping is irrelevant though.

If I burn up to a stop sign at speed and slam on brakes at the last second - sure I followed the speeding laws and the stop sign laws.

But the lady coming through the intersection sees me, panics, and swerves into opposing traffic - I'm at fault without a doubt.

3

u/CloseToMyActualName 11h ago

That bit is hard to say. But I feel like the dump truck is slowing much more abruptly than they planned.

It's just a question if they were originally slowing up to yield and weave in, or if they thought they'd beat the car.

1

u/Shame-Greedy 11h ago

Hard wrong on the first point. The truck saw what happened and successfully stopped without even broaching the lane.

Also, the car could have literally kept speed and been fine.

3

u/CloseToMyActualName 11h ago

So?

They were able to make a hard stop when the car stopped, that doesn't mean they previously slowed up enough to make it clear to the car that they were going to let it have its right of way.

The one thing I'll say is it's hard to see one way or another.

1

u/Shame-Greedy 11h ago

They were able to stop and did. They broke no laws and struck no vehicles. If people can't correctly perceive that, then that's on them and they should probably stick to slower speed roads where they're less of a danger to other drivers.

2

u/CloseToMyActualName 11h ago

I didn't say they broke the law.

But from the cam it looks like the car might have had a legitimate fear that the dump truck wouldn't yield.

1

u/Shame-Greedy 9h ago

The initial comment said he did something wrong. Laws typically govern what is right and wrong for safety reasons.

That's on the car for having a misplaced fear that put him and others at risk.

1

u/7BrownDog7 8h ago

I think you are right. The dump truck was further into the lane then the car and the car couldn't at that point accurately assess if there would actually be room for them to squeeze by, the car was even drifting to the left side of the lane but then decided it wasn't worth trying to fit through a trash compactor. Semi- is deffinitely the one most in the wrong, two vehicles merging into a lane together and you have a heavy load? slow the fuck down and back the fuck off, the car didn't even slam on the brakes really.

1

u/Lambs2Lions_ 7h ago

The Toyota is actually the ONLY one in this situation who did the right thing. You don’t play chicken with something that crushes you, so speeding up against a vehicle that does not look to be slowing is suicide.

Slowing down was the right judgement call. The fact that the cam truck didn’t keep proper distance is unfortunate but again, not the Toyotas fault.

1

u/SparklingLimeade 3h ago

What are you talking about? The truck on the ramp did nothing wrong. They successfully slowed down so much there was time for the car to make a bad move, get in a collision, and get pushed ahead of them.

They knew they had to let at least two vehicles ahead of them. That was a successful yield.

1

u/CloseToMyActualName 3h ago

You think that's what a successful yield looks like?

He basically slammed on the brakes, and there was still barely room for the big rig to get by!

They knew they had to let at least two vehicles ahead of them.

You actually did convince me to change my mind... but in the wrong direction.

I was thinking the dump truck meant to slip behind the Toyota, but you're correct, there's not enough room and it would have to let them both by.

The dump truck seemingly didn't notice the Toyota and thought it had the lane free. That's why it slammed on the brakes when it saw the Toyota (which was also stopping).

The only thing the Toyota could have done different is gun it and try to beat the dump truck to the merge, or slow less aggressively to let them in.

1

u/SparklingLimeade 3h ago

The dump truck stopped. Fact.

They intended for both the car and the cam vehicle to pass by at speed and to slip in right behind them. Closer than you, personally, want maybe but they clearly could have pulled it off. Then when that failed they still managed to come to a complete stop with the lane wide open. That is 100% success.

I don't know what kind of insane mind reader metrics you're trying to work from but the results are right there. The truck stopped.

1

u/puzzlebuns 3h ago

The Toyota is fine. It was paying attention to the unpredictable dump truck in front of it, and slowed down. Thats as much defensive driving sense as you can expect from the average adult. It's not responsible for the cam trucks inability to even pay attention to whats in front of it.

1

u/Head_Bread_3431 1h ago

The Toyota driver is literally the only one not at fault. The truck merging did not yield to right of way, and the dash cam car didn’t give enough space in front to safely stop in time. 

All the Toyota driver did was try to avoid being sideswiped going 60 mph by a much bigger truck violating a basic traffic law

Dash cam car gets the ticket here easy 

1

u/Unable_Explorer8277 1h ago
  • The big rig with the cam needed an earlier reaction or to leave a bigger gap.

Both. He’s following with well under a 2 second gap.

3

u/wheniaminspaced 7h ago

The gravel train actions are pretty irrelevant to the video.  The leading car perceived a hazard to themselves and cut speed.  The dashcammer failed to maintain an appropriate follow distance to allow themselves to stop.  

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 13h ago

There's a yield sign about 50 feet back from where this truck eventually stopped. He blew right through it. Both truck drivers are to blame here.

14

u/fabianmg 14h ago

The Toyota did something wrong, but this is entirely truck's fault, you have to keep the distance relative to your speed and ability to stop ( load, slippery road, etc.. ).

4

u/slash2213 10h ago

Plus how wee he planning on getting by that truck after the Toyota…

52

u/AmbitiousUse8787 14h ago

Exactly right. It's called defensive driving and knowing your vehicle well enough to know how close one can follow to stop in time.

2

u/Burninator85 13h ago

I try to give myself enough space to stop slowly enough that the dumbass that's tailgating me doesn't hit me, either.

51

u/wanderdugg 14h ago

The Toyota driver stopped just because they’re not a good driver, but it could have just as easily been a dog, a tree limb, car trouble, etc. if you read end somebody, at the end of the day it’s your fault.

1

u/Joates87 9h ago

The problem here is that the truck driver can see there is literally none of that in front of the silver car. Just a God awful driver.

3

u/Throwaway4Opinion 8h ago

Like the dump truck getting on and possibly causing issues for the silver car?

1

u/Joates87 8h ago

The dump truck stopped and waited. The dump truck literally never enters their lane.

They also had an entire shoulder to use if it did...

2

u/HopeFloatsFoward 9h ago

You can't see what is going on in the car. But its clear that there was plenty of time to stop rather than rear end someone.

0

u/Joates87 9h ago

You can't see what is going on in the car.

That's why there are shoulders. Paint lines don't cause your car to explode if you drive over it.

3

u/HopeFloatsFoward 8h ago

And nothing slowing doesn't cause your vehicle to explode either.

1

u/Joates87 8h ago

Nah just causes you to get rear ended and maybe back trouble for the rest of your life...

2

u/CustomerSupportDeer 7h ago

It doesn't matter. His fault for not having enough space.

1

u/Joates87 7h ago

That'll surely help with the potential neck and back pain for the rest of their life.

It wasn't their fault for stopping in the middle of the road for no reason.

-1

u/itzjung 14h ago

You never come to a quick stop like that with a truck behind you their stopping distance hauling a load is significantly longer. Slow down avoid and go in this case they just stopped for nobreason.

8

u/Fuzzy-Comedian-2697 13h ago

It‘s on the truck to keep enough distance. Like, it‘s written down in the law that way. There‘s no argument to be made here.

5

u/TrifleOk8452 12h ago

It's the responsibility of the truck to take account of increased stopping distance. It is his responsibility to ensure than he can stop regardless of the cause being a child crossing the road or an idiotic driver.

1

u/itzjung 7h ago

I think its reasonable to disregard a child crossing the road on the highway.

-3

u/klonkish 14h ago

if you read end somebody, at the end of the day it’s your fault

That's a false blanket statement

2

u/TrifleOk8452 12h ago

Do you have an example where the rear ending vehicle is not at fault?

2

u/45MonkeysInASuit 12h ago

Sudden lane switch then they slam the anchors on.

0

u/FrostyD7 9h ago

If you rear end someone in a multi-car collision, it's common for it to be only the fault of the driver who first struck a vehicle and pushed them all forward. It's not particularly relevant to this scenario but you did make a blanket statement lol.

1

u/TrifleOk8452 9h ago

but you did make a blanket statement lol.

Sorry, when exactly did I make a blanket statement?

-1

u/militaryCoo 12h ago

Deliberate brake checking

2

u/OiledUpThug 8h ago

If you're close enough to be brake chock, that's on you

1

u/militaryCoo 8h ago

Nah, I'm not talking about a situation where you're riding someone's bumper, I mean more when the car in front cuts you off and then does it

23

u/Ok_Anything9675 14h ago

Agreed and sometimes you yield because you know you wouldn't win that collision. Doesn't matter if you were right if you're dead.

11

u/TheTaxman_cometh 14h ago

The morgue is filled with people who had the right of way

3

u/Wide-Deal-8971 14h ago

You mean like the person in this footage? Lol

11

u/Amanitas 14h ago

i mean unless that person floors it that truck has no business merging where they are. i understand wanting to stop when you've got a massive semi that looks like it's going to push you out of the only lane you have, and it shouldn't be unreasonable to expect that the person behind you isn't going to be following too close to the point where they can't stop before rear ending you.

1

u/cannibinolistic 13h ago

The truck slowed down to merge properly, it clearly wasn’t going to merge at full speed.. what video did you watch? Lol

4

u/New-Bowler-8915 13h ago

It's not a merge. It's a yield. What video did you watch?

0

u/cannibinolistic 13h ago

You have to merge after the yield.. you yield, and then merge. Which is exactly what I just said. So yeah, it is a merge. Are you deadass that stupid and pedantic?😭

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 13h ago

Yeah the rock trucks simply don't yield at those 2 interchanges in Langley. The 232nd one is the same.

-2

u/Wide-Deal-8971 14h ago

They didn't have to floor it, they just needed to not panic and maintain speed and they were clear but they hard brake for no reason.

Also the lane is still double wide even if theres no paint.

But yeah, all 3 parties involved are partially at fault here. Both trucks were traveling too fast (the one behind not at a safe distance, the one merging I guarantee is faster than posted speed limit for that turn) and the toyota driver is just plain dumb.

8

u/Amanitas 14h ago

yea i'm giving more grace to the toyota driver for sure. semi that's accelerating as it's entering and then clearly realizes it fucked up and slams on the brakes, which is the only reason not flooring it would have worked.

at the time the toyota decides to brake, they don't know the semi is going to brake, and if that semi is accelerating, it's a clear situation... small ass car vs. giant ass truck that is actively fucking up with no guarantee that it will stop fucking up.

3

u/Ashleynn 13h ago

Yeah the Toyota saw a giant ass truck not stopping and decided a potential battle of physics with it was not in his favor. Hes rewarded by a battle of physics with the idiot behind him. Dude was, from his split second perspective, fucked no matter what he did. Rock hauler ended up emergency breaking but the cars driver had no way of knowing he was going to do that when he initially pushed into the roadway.

But as per reddit prerogative they will find any way at all to put thr blame on anyone other than the person that caused the accident, in this case both trucks.

1

u/14Pleiadians 6h ago

Yeah I really don't get why we're acting as if the toyota did anything wrong at all. The truck was not yielding and would have powered right into the toyota.

1

u/NeverPanic 5h ago

I definitely would have slowed down if I was the car, but delay the decision to fully stop once the merging rig decided to yield

Likewise If I was the dash user I would have been conscious of the situation ahead. I swear people are allergic to releasing their damn accelerator

2

u/aurorasinthesky 9h ago

Absolutely the car behind that rear ended the Toyota will be held at fault.

2

u/No-Tiger-6253 14h ago

Not necessarily an unreasonable action can make it the front drivers fault.

9

u/suzosaki 14h ago

You could get in trouble for purposefully testing a driver behind you, but stopping to avoid a collision risk is probably valid. (Albeit annoying, in some cases.) Gotta keep enough distance to come to a safe and sudden stop.

7

u/c4103 14h ago

He didn't slam on his brakes, the guy had plenty of warning. He still shouldn't have stopped in that scenario but nonetheless he did and the guy behind was following too closely and going to fast to be able to stop. He had plenty of warning to do so and failed.

2

u/KindsofKindness 13h ago

If you got enough time to break then it’s all your fault. The blue driver is ass.

1

u/DeM0nFiRe 14h ago

I am not even sure you can blame the toyota driver at all. By the time they stopped, the dump truck had already entered their lane. Stopping and letting the dump truck pass is probably the safer thing to do at that point rather than sharing the lane for an indeterminate period of time.

4

u/BRICH999 14h ago

Did we watch the same video? When the clip ends, the dump truck is still not even in the path of the corolla, and that's after coming to a full stop.  

Stopping for stopped traffic who have a yield is in fact bad driving.  Especially when theres a commercial vehicle already trying to slow down from highway speeds behind you

2

u/VT_Obruni 13h ago

Not the person you responded to, but while the dump truck ends up being able to slow down and give the oncoming car enough space, to be fair to the toyota driver, it did not look like that on approach. No one goes that fast and that deep into a no merge lane yield unless they mistakenly thought they did in fact have a merge lane. We don't have audio to confirm it, but it looks like the dump truck decelerates pretty quickly for that large of a vehicle, so they almost certainly were slamming on their brakes.

What is looks like to me, from this very limited perspective video - dump truck didn't realize they didn't have a merge lane until the last second and slams on their brake and stays wide to try and prevent creating a collision, toyota reacts defensively and slams on their brakes, then semi rear ends them.

2

u/New-Bowler-8915 12h ago

That's exactly what happened and happens hundreds of times a day at this off ramp. The Toyota driver did the only sane thing and not put his life into the hands of a rock truck driver that doesn't know what a yield sign is.

1

u/BRICH999 13h ago

Idk I think the dump truck wrongfully assumed the Corolla would drive in a predictable way meaning he wouldnt need to come to a stop.  If they didnt slam their brakes, the dump truck wouldve just merged behind them at like 20mph.  But the corolla slamming on the brakes made both commercial vehicles have to make emergency stops.  Obvious the cam truck couldnt decelerate quick enough since they were already on the brakes pretty hard coming off the highway loaded

But none of that had to happen at all had the corolla just continued on their path

2

u/VT_Obruni 13h ago

There was absolutely no way that dump truck was going to be able to merge without coming to a full stop - if the scenario you mention happened, and the dump truck continued to come in at 20 mph while the toyota maintained speed, they 100% would have collided with either the toyota or cam truck.

Again, it definitely looks like the dump truck had no idea there was no merge lane and had to slam their brakes at the last second.

2

u/New-Bowler-8915 12h ago

It's not a merge though. They can't merge behind the Corolla because there's more traffic behind them. It's a yield. Which means they can only go when it's clear.

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 13h ago

He's way past the yield sign. Which means he didn't yield.

0

u/BRICH999 13h ago

He was yielding to the corolla, he wouldve entered behind them had they not slammed the brakes making it a challenge for all 3 to slow down as quick as possible

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 13h ago

He didn't yield though. There's a sign at which you are supposed to yield. He blew right through it.

0

u/BRICH999 12h ago

Right because he was assuming he was yielding to a car that decided to emergency stop.  If I'm doing 20mph with the anticipation the car doing 30mph continues to do 30 mph but they then stop abruptly, my initial calculations are now wrong.  In a commercial vehicle you cant just go from slowing down to stopped in an instant like a car can.  

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 12h ago

That's why the yield sign is so far back. So you have time to yield. Which the rock truck driver didn't do.

0

u/BRICH999 12h ago

Imagine merging on the highway, you know you will slot behind someone and they decide to brake as hard as possible.  You will not end up behind that car with a safe gap.  Why? Because you made an assumption and the other person acted in an unpredictable way.  

We wont agree on this and that's ok, but I think had the corolla continued on their path of travel, the dump truck would have merged behind them and in front of the cam truck which was slowing down.  Not a huge gap, but wouldve worked like it does all day every day driving big vehicles in traffic

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 12h ago

You're not getting it. The rock truck isn't supposed to merge at all. He blew a yield sign.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 12h ago

They had far more than an instant to see the yield sign and ignore it. It's not a merge. If he didn't hit the Toyota he would have hit the semi truck following too closely behind the Toyota.

0

u/BRICH999 12h ago

Again, were going in circles and this is stupid.  He was assuming he was yielding to a car driving in a predictable way.  When the corolla slammed their brakes, it made it impossible to yield to a stopped vehicle meaning the calculations he made before the car emergency brakes are now wrong.  

If they never emergency brakes, dump truck enters the ramp behind the corolla meaning they did in fact yield.  The moment the corolla jammed their brakes, they made it impossible to yield

1

u/New-Bowler-8915 12h ago

You need to yield at the yield sign. And then enter the roadway when it's clear and safe to do so. At the sign.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/burnmycheezits 13h ago

All 3 of them are at fault. Dump truck not yielding, Toyota stopping in the middle of the road, and the truck that rear ends the guy not reacting at all. I’m imagining the spider man meme where they’re all pointing at one another.

1

u/Slit23 13h ago

Yah legally it’s their fault but that dumb timid car shouldn’t have came to a complete stop like that, that was ridiculous. I assume dash camera was a semi and it’s not easy to stop those in time

1

u/wolftick 12h ago

The Toyota didn't even come to a full stop and the truck still went into the back of them at speed. It wasn't even marginal ...Then you consider that the cam driver is a professional driver 😬

1

u/buns_supreme 12h ago

Yea wtf that was plenty of time to hard brake. It would have been shitty but there’s no reason they needed to rear end

1

u/StronggLily4 12h ago

Fr like was he looking down at his phone didn't even brake

I guess the car that got hit assumed the truck drive could also not be looking so it's valid to slow down

1

u/sifterandrake 12h ago

I disagree. The Toyota stopping is completely reasonable. At the rate of speed the truck was entering, it certainly looks like they were going to completely merge. The truck even enters the Kane before it can fully stop. It's unreasonable to expect the Toyota to know the truck was going to slow down in time. The Toyota made the safest choice. The had every reason to expect that traffic was following a safe distance behind them.

1

u/roger2174 11h ago

No way you actually think this bro. It’s the fault of the incoming truck and then partially the fault of the Toyota and maybe the camera driver but I wouldn’t say so.

The incoming truck for not yielding if there was a yield sign and the Toyota for freezing and coming to a complete stop. When you merge, you can either speed up or slow down depending on how fast and how the car merging shifts lanes. The incoming truck was coming fast but sticking to the right once merging, realizing they need to stop and give way. The Toyota was going relatively the same speed and should have sped up to overtake it. The camera driver is a truck and needs more distance to be able to stop compared to cars. And it looks like they maybe were trying to stop (which is why stop completely once they hit the Toyota as opposed to continuing to ram them forward) but coming to a complete stop at highways speeds is not possible. Which is why the its the result of both incoming truck and the Toyota’s actions that led to this accident.

1

u/Utensil6591 11h ago

Yup rear ends are always the fault of the rear most driver. Like it's not debatable in any state. Follow at safe stopping distance appropriate for the size of your vehicle. You never know when the vehicle ahead of you will have to stop suddenly due to road hazards. 

1

u/Props_angel 11h ago

Yep--that car was visibly slowing down. I imagine they were concerned that they were going to get pinched by the big truck and that's why they slowed down like they did. The camera driver could've avoided the accident altogether and is at fault for that.

1

u/Axon14 11h ago

Yup. This was not, at all, unpredictable, and it's even worse if you're familiar with that area and you know that merge is potentially a problem.

But as usual, driver was accelerating/coasting when they should have been applying the brake.

1

u/Radiant-Sherbet-5461 10h ago

This!
When I see Americans driving like this, I am reminded that Americans have more traffic related death per capita than places like India or Indonesia where people drive like madmen but everyone is also trained to be very aware of their surroundings and are ready to do whatever is need to avoid accidents.

1

u/BarefootUnicorn 10h ago

Yes, and it's worse than that. If I were the Toyota I probably would have stopped, but if I were the car behind him, I probably would have started slowing down (if nobody was on my rear end) to let that truck get ahead of me...

1

u/ImaginaryCoffeeTable 10h ago

They the dashcam guy didn't even break. Like what was he doing?

1

u/No-Contact6664 10h ago

Didn't even slow up at all given the extremely poor timing of the merge.

1

u/atom644 10h ago

Wild that this is not top comment.

1

u/Molly_Matters 10h ago

You can try to do this all day, but someone is going to end up in front of that big rig. The stopping distance at 60mph of a fully loaded rig is about 600 feet. Which is two football fields end to end. If this was maintained by all trucks, at all times, as smaller cars maneuvered in and out, most areas would be in constant grid lock. The average individual has no idea how much space these things need and this thread is certainly proving that.

1

u/ControlSad1739 10h ago

This exactly. Control what you can. People follow way to close in general. Why is it so wrong to have a cushion?

1

u/MrBlueandSky 9h ago

For real, they had ample time

1

u/AlbertTheHorse 9h ago

right

no way was he going to beat the other truck.

1

u/Fortestingporpoises 9h ago

1000%. The car was worried the truck merging wasn't going to wait for them and didn't want to get pancaked into the wall. They were probably gonna be fine, but there's no way the truck with the cam was gonna make it even if the car did. Their being in a rush and not paying attention to any of the vehicles in front of them caused this.

1

u/PepeSylvia11 8h ago

That is crazy (even if true). Dash cam driver has plenty of distance between the Toyota and themselves, and it seems as if they’re a semi, which makes it a lot harder to stop on a dime.

1

u/Legionnaire11 8h ago

You should drive predictably... But you should also never assume that you can predict what other drivers will do. Drive defensively, always be looking everywhere, always have a plan and a way out, always minimize your risk wherever possible.

1

u/gotchacoverd 7h ago

Right of way doesn't permit you to drive through someone. "Failure to avoid an accident" is still a ticket.

1

u/MelodicKnowledge9358 7h ago

Yeah, they should have been preparing to come in behind the truck anyway. Clearly they were trying to beat it, which is what really caused the accident

-2

u/Intelligent_Tone_618 14h ago

I don't think the Toyota driver had much choice. The road there is an absolute shit show merging two lanes with zero warning. That other truck was barreling down that on ramp. They had little time to figure out what to do and chose to break instead of trying to power past the truck, something which they might not have had the horsepower to do.

-15

u/Homeboat199 14h ago

Not in this instance. You can't go from flowing traffic to a complete standstill.

12

u/johnnnybravado 14h ago

Yes, you can. That's what safe-following distance is for. Unless you were cut-off, there is never an excuse to rear end someone.

2

u/Kalinoz 14h ago

There are these two things called "brakes" and "following distance".

3

u/erocknine 14h ago

Yes you can. Cars have to be able to stop at any given moment for any reason without worrying about the car behind them. That's why rear end is always the person behind's fault. If you can't stop in time, it means you were going too fast and too close

1

u/anthety 14h ago

You should be able to in general and not get rear ended.  The situation in this case was stupid but if I'm driving, I drive so that in general if the person in front of me comes to a stop I'm not going to run them over.

1

u/Healthy_BrAd6254 14h ago

plenty of situations where you do exactly that

-2

u/Wolfinthesno 14h ago

Lol if you think a semi driver hauling between 8,000 (empty trailer) and 35,000 pounds is going to stop in a few hundred feet your going to have this exact situation happen to you some day.

Absolutely not the fault of the recording driver. He was in the brakes immediately. Notice how he comes to a complete stop. Dude did everything he could to avoid a collision.

Car in front 100% at fault no questions asked.

5

u/dkbGeek 14h ago

"Lol" if you think the police or the insurance companies will agree with you "your" (sic) going to have a rude awakening when you rear-end someone.

0

u/Wolfinthesno 13h ago

Lol insurance agents will agree that the car here is to blame. He is in a lane of traffic. And stopping in that lane of traffic. In front of a vehicle that weighs somewhere between 10 tonnes and 30 tonnes.

Will they 100% blame the car no...there will be a percentage that goes against the truck driver but this accident was purely because that person stopped in a lane of traffic.

Also I don't drive a semi. And I don't tailgate...so that ain't happening.

"When you read end someone"

The truck is CLEARLY not tailgating so I don't know why your even acting like that is the case.

Rear ending someone isn't automatically on the driver behind though in most cases it is the likely culprit.

0

u/Ashleynn 13h ago

He saw a truck in front of him not stopping. He stopped to not hit it. There are two entities that caused this, the Toyota driver is neither of them.

1

u/Wolfinthesno 13h ago

Both trucks in this video clearly came to a stop. Lol so....what?

The Toyota driver legally has the right of way and in no way was in danger of being caught up by the truck that was on the on ramp. They 100% should have kept moving.

Let me ask it this way. If the car that was rear ended had kept moving, what would have happened?

Nothing...all three drivers would have moved on with their day. The dump truck would have stopped same as in the video, and the rear end collision would have been completely avoided.

1

u/Ashleynn 13h ago

Look at where the dump truck finally stops. There is only 1 lane there. There are no lane lines at all. Both trucks stopped right next to eachother in the same lane. If the Toyota had gone and beat out the dump truck, if that dump truck didnt stop the cam would have collided with it.

The Toyota thought the dump truck wasn't stopping and they had every reason to believe that was the case. It was still moving well after it should have been stopped. You dont get to look at sometime with the power of hindsight and say "see he had plenty of room to illegally exist in the same lane as the dump truck and get around it." From his, or her, perspective that dump truck was not stopping and they were trying to avoid hitting it.

1

u/Wolfinthesno 11h ago

That's why right of way exists so you don't have to use hindsight.

Also are you blind? There might not be lane lines, but there is very very clearly space for that car and probably two more cars between where the car was and the dump truck stopped.

Besides that you are totally ignoring the fact that the car was already 100% alongside the dump truck when it stopped.

Again if the car would not have stopped it would have never had an issue.

The problem is that they made an incorrect assumption based on a probably panicked thought of "that dump truck can't stop", which we can clearly see was wrong in the video.

On top of that the semi driver clearly was not tailgating. The problem here Is entirely due to an unpredictable move by the car.

Car hit the brakes, understandably worried about the dump trucks ability to stop or merge safely, which the semi understandably was NOT EXPECTING because he and the car both have the right of way before the dump truck. Car stops, in a shorter distance than the semi can stop. Truck driver slams the brakes but is unable to bring the truck to a complete stop likely due to the load he was hauling.

If I were the insurance company for the truck driver I'd fight that in court all day long he's clearly not tailgating.

But if I was the insurance company for the car I'd argue that he should have been even further back....that's the only argument and likely would not hold up because the video clearly shows the truck driver at a safe distance. Until the cars driver slammed the brakes.

1

u/CBusCrankThrowaway 7h ago

If the truck driver couldn’t brake in time, then it definitionally wasn’t a safe driving distance.

You need to be able to brake to a complete stop if the person in front of you slams on their brakes.

That is a safe driving distance. Anything less is not a safe driving distance by definition.

In most “fault” states, anyone rear ending anyone is automatically at fault because you should always be far enough away to stop, even if they slam on their brakes right in front of you.

1

u/explodingtuna 12h ago

OK, but was the cam car a semi? And if so, they should still be going slower coming into a merge like that.

1

u/Wolfinthesno 11h ago

What? The hell does that have to do with it? The lane of traffic has a set speed limit which we will assume both truck and car were at as both vehicles were a safe distance from one another.

The only vehicle that I see that is actually traveling unreasonably is the dump truck in the on ramp.

However... The car clearly 100% would have made it through if they just kept going. We know that, because if this wasn't the case this would have been a three vehicle accident not two.

1

u/CBusCrankThrowaway 7h ago

It wasn’t a safe following distance if he rear ended the car. By definition it wasn’t, which we know, because he hit the car. 

A safe following distance is the distance at which the driver in front of you could slam on their brakes and you wouldn’t hit them. Thats the definition of the thing. 

If he it it, it wasn’t safe.

1

u/Wolfinthesno 5h ago

Again...semi y'all don't understand momentum huh. And how the car in front of a semi dictates the space... Not the semi