Hit a car stopped in hammer lane

Most States/Troopers/Local fuzz just keep hanging paper
and let the courts throw the ones out that don't stick.
Ain't it a great system, or what? Gotta love it!!

 

You’re supposed to drive as fast as you can see to stop. When entering a blind curve you want to be off the throttle or low throttle (if applicable not considering uphills) and at a speed that you can stop safely without tipping the trailer. I don’t like to automatically assume things but it seems very apparent it was raining cats and dogs probably dark and you were in the hammer lane because you were passing just about everyone. Hopefully you can get out of this easy if not atleast you didn’t kill anyone so here’s your wake up call driver.

 

Not much more to be said, If you can not stop, your traveling to fast for conditions, period...

 

Oh yeah, you have the right to remain silent, start using it. Stuff you post on boards like thi, os considered to be admissible in court.

 

I love this part:
"I'm not expecting a car to be stopping in hammer lane when there are no exits"

So, when there are exits MissJ expects cars to stop in the hammer lane?

 

This is for everyone reading this:

Any time and anywhere there is the possibility a vehicle may be disabled in a lane of travel.

Unless equipped with x-ray vision, hills and curves REQUIRE slowing to a speed commensurate with total stopping distance.

Understand that, there is no such thing as an accident, only operator error, and you’ll clean up your act.

“Can’t fix stupid” covers following other vehicles too closely, entering curves or cresting hills too fast, etc, as it’s a constant for the majority of drivers. (Include yourself).

Start testing for stupidity. Irresponsibility. (It works).

My Dad and I figured the only possible exception might be a hit from the rear while at a mandatory stop AND surrounded by other traffic. Next to no room to maneuver.

(What? You don’t think to watch your mirrors at a stop? You aren’t backed off from the intersection line or the vehicle in front of you in order to facilitate maneuver?)

Operator error doesn’t end until one is OFF the roadway, safely parked, brakes engaged and engine off.

“At fault” isn’t a defense against accident avoidance. You, your passengers and your vehicle demand other than slack-jawed mindlessness.

Accept the consequences. But fight to minimize damages first. One may be guilty, but hope for the courts mercy towards typical stupidity.

And from now on, be other than “typical”. That, “all the other kids do it” quit working in kindergarten.

A man, an American, is assumed to have the tools and the maturity to modify whatever is necessary as a driver.

All men may be sinners, but not all can learn. Are they then men? Have they souls who can’t learn right from wrong?

There is that which is REQUIRED. Find out which side of that line you fall.

.

 

Simple, the auto did not hit the truck....that is all that will matter to the judge.

 

Slow, I may not be bright about this accident stuff like some of the experts here, but she said she hit the left rear of the car, think about that .... left rear of the car.

Now someone could explain it ...

 

Swerving to her left to try and miss it once she realized she couldn’t stop?

 

Could be. I don't know she said she didn't want to ditch the truck, so I would think she hit it straight, not where she would hit the left side.

I wish she would post the video.

 

Google Earth doesn’t show much room to go to the left but that’s all I can figure if she didn’t hit it square, unless the car was sitting slightly crossways in the lane.