I'm not implying anything but rather refusing to engaging in your argument because you are wrong, no court would ever agree with you, and you are unable to comprehend basic traffic situations that every driver has experienced.
You also appear to be unable to understand concepts like line of sight and velocity.
I'll leave you and your well earned flair as I've got better shit to do. Best of luck with your "I'm ultra chad and everyone else is stupid LARP".
concepts like line of sight and velocity.
Watch the cops body cam that was over by the fire tender who was first to run over to the car - the road is straight for hundreds and hundreds of feet.
You're actually suggesting if a brick wall was put in her lane - how could she avoid it if there's no lights and traffic cones. Inattention and distracted.
Seriously , someone has got to be some kind of goofy to run into a stationary vehicle from over two miles away and not realize it hasnt actually moved and you're just continually getting closer and closer to it. It didnt just appear out of nowhere.
but sure defend away.
EDIT: no much different to a rubber necker at an accident scene running up the back end of a stopped vehicle . ''Reeeeee the vehicle in front didn't have lights on'.
(post is archived)