The tailgater was of the super aggressive type and 100% in the wrong for their actions. If they'd looked at the road situation they would have seen the merging car that meant moving to the right was a bad idea for the car in front, and waited the extra 10-20 seconds it would have taken for the first car to safely move over.

The front car did nothing wrong until they braked unnecessarily because they were upset at being tailgated. It is always the following cars fault if they rear end someone, but I wouldn't be surprised if the police were tempted to charge them with something like dangerous driving based on that footage. I'm sure they could argue their foot slipped or they thought they saw a deer though.

So yeah, both are jerks in my mind but the tailgater made it all possible.

I think it's lame to argue for either driver being in the right.

A good driver being tailgated in this situation would wait till they could safely merge to the slow lane, do so, letting the tailgater pass safely. Brake checking (which I assume it is) shows incompetence behind the wheel.

The tailgater should not be tailgating. Always leave enough room for any emergency situation. If you must alert the driver in front of you that you would like to pass then a high beam flicker should hopefully do the trick. If not, suck it up, and deal with it like a reasonable driver. Don't be a dick head on the road.

This accident only happened, because there was a two for two, in the shit driving department. ALWAYS choose to be the bigger man/women on the road. Someones life may depend on it.

I guess the question is then are we going to be like the grasshopper or the ant? Will we prepare for the eventuality that automation and political corruptness (based on the demands of cheap employment pools and the money they receive from corporations desperate to keep that status quo) will merge together for the perfect storm? My problem is the attrition has been slow, just compounding the problem...

Why does it have to be Doomsday? Can't that be the NEXT movie?! Why merge these events? WHY GOD! *mutilates his body* I can't stop. the. cutting. You're LITERALLY killing me, guys.

And not to confuse lines made by vigilantes from other current movie trailers but Doomsday looks like "an avocado had sex with an older avocado." AKA a ballsack.

So wrist cutting and avocado ballsack. Oh look, it's badly CGI'd Wonder Woman. I have never been so inspired to look up porn of Wonder Woman being double teamed by Batman and Superman.

Why won't you take off your mask, Bruce?

I dunno, why won't you wear these glasses while I cum on your face, Clark?

You're supposed to cum on Diana's face, Bruce!

No way, boys, you're my bitches tonight. (Hint: The strap on of truth.)

Where is Dick Grayson in all of this? Locked in the gimp box.

It took 8 months to replace a much smaller bridge on a section of highway I drive on every week. On one side, they build a new bridge beside the old one, routed traffic onto it, then tore down the old one and build the new one. After that they routed traffic from the other side onto the new bridge (making it 1-lane each way) and replaced the bridge on that side. That was a couple of years ago.

Now they're replacing another bridge, smaller than the previous one, a few miles from it. There was enough room between the lanes to build a bridge between them, route both sides onto it and replace both sides. That went a little quicker, I think it went on for 3-4 months. They just opened the new bridges a few weeks ago. It looks like they're keeping the "temp" bridge up on this spot though because they've merged all three into what looks like one bridge, but it's still a 4-lane section of highway.

I'm not clear what you mean by compartmentalizing & general friends bit exactly but..

Yes, human tend to gravitate towards distinct groups.
The terms coined would be In-groups or Out-groups.

In terms of society, people who socialize in non-normative ways are stigmatized as part of an Out-group. Any fringe culture.

e.g. - Those weirdo who can only make friends online.


However, for all us interweb nerds. Befriending stranger online IS the norm.

So we become the In-group, and those cocky extroverted socialite types are the Out-group.

This is effectively what's happening when you try to merge two circles of friends and they awkward reject one another.


So more or less.. no, "general" wholly inclusive friendships or In-group are not a thing.

You would all need one common thread.
Somewhere those threads would begin to divert too much and that circle would close ranks.

Hence, why Utopia is impossible.

Cool idea tho.

Crap....I just took your word that I was wrong. Just minor googling shows me that I was essentially right, and what you speak of happened near the end of total allied control of Germany. We've essentially had bases there since the end of the war.
WIKI-
In practice, each of the four occupying powers wielded government authority in their respective zones and carried out different policies toward the population and local and state governments there. A uniform administration of the western zones evolved, known first as the Bizone (the American and British zones merged as of 1 January 1947) and later the Trizone (after inclusion of the French zone). The complete breakdown of east-west allied cooperation and joint administration in Germany became clear with the Soviet imposition of the Berlin Blockade that was enforced from June 1948 to May 1949. The three western zones were merged to form the Federal Republic of Germany in May 1949, and the Soviets followed suit in October 1949 with the establishment of the German Democratic Republic (GDR).

In the west, the occupation continued until 5 May 1955, when the General Treaty (German: Deutschlandvertrag) entered into force. However, upon the creation of the Federal Republic in May 1949, the military governors were replaced by civilian high commissioners, whose powers lay somewhere between those of a governor and those of an ambassador. When the Deutschlandvertrag became law, the occupation ended, the western occupation zones ceased to exist, and the high commissioners were replaced by normal ambassadors. West Germany was also allowed to build a military, and the Bundeswehr, or Federal Defense Force, was established on 12 November 1955.

Will YOU stand corrected? ...or was this a misunderstanding of what I meant by 'why the bases are in Germany', because I do understand those reasons have changed over time, as you indicated...I was talking about the original reason we stationed American military there.

Say what you will about Bob's hyperbole, but I'm sorry, this is starting to merge into the "not completely what I'd call acting Presidential" area.

Appearing on shows is one thing, makes you look connected and "of the people". Being part of a gag is kinda sad. This whole mean tweets thing is like watching people pop zits, if you ask me. There's respect lost for the Office, imho.

Didn't anyone else notice the truck was trying to get out of the way by going into the side strip?

Stupid VW driver, clearly that cars fault as the damage is all along the side of her car, clearly no room for that car to merge and obviously did not look over shoulder.

Huh...the car actually slams into him on purpose to avoid rear-ending the other semi...that is humorous because it was 100% intentional. You see the car jerk, and I watched it multiple times to see if he hit something beforehand that would cause it to swerve and no, it did not...that is one hell of a felony.

Just because he lost the fight he pulled that bullshit? Whoa, I would have hated to see some kid's brains splattered on the street because someone purposely rammed another vehicle while being a dick...might have been road rage or w/e...

As far as the gap closing, yeah, it is pretty obvious the trucker doesn't want the car to cut in front of him when it isn't legal or right for that to happen. The trucker has this right because it is this forced-tailgating when people merge that causes accidents. HE OBVIOUSLY MAKES AN EDUCATED GUESS THAT THE DUMB BITCH WON'T RAM HIM, but he is proven wrong.

The truck saw the car.
The truck had time to move left. He clearly saw the car.
The truck never even tried to hit his breaks or slow down.
The truck hit the car either on purpose, or undue care and attention.
The truck driver was distracted on his phone, and never missed a beat in his conversation.

The car was a full car length ahead of the truck when it started to merge - If I could see the car signaling, he could have seen the car signaling. There was room.

We all know that trucks have a longer stopping time. But a single tap on the break instead of holding his foot on the accelerator would have avoided the collision.
And no, the traffic wasn't slowing down ahead - they were all passing and keeping what looks like a steady pace.
If the truck thought he needed to warn the car, he could have used his horn, but he was too busy on his phone.

You probably should, as the issue of him intentionally closing the gap is addressed numerous times by the fact that this isn't a pickup truck, it's a semi, which is incapable of speeding up that quickly to intentionally block the person trying to merge, and if you pay closer attention to the cars ahead of the truck, it looks more like the gap was closed from the front, not behind (traffic looks to be slowing down as it nears the top of a hill)

"The blond" also doesn't signal that they're merging until just before they're literally moving into the lane which means that a Semi would basically not have the time to slow down to avoid the collision anyway.

*Note, proper lane changing technique is: Check your mirror, put on your blinker, check your blind spot, merge. NOT - put on signal, merge.

It is not about how the trucker did not allow the other car to merge, it is the fact the stupid fuck tried to merge and continued to try and merge, the onus is not on the truck to move over, it is on the other driver to merge and change lane properly.

Reign downvotes on me, Babe

You really want to pin the fault on that phone.. there is no fault on that phone. The accident was a side impact, someone drove INTO the truck.. the truck did not drive into anyone, it did not lose control, run any lights, he was doing everything he was supposed to. Just because he was on the phone did not impact anything but his ability to react quickly to a stupid driver making an illegal merge.

Oh yea if he was another semi truck, he cant just slam on the breaks. His load would jackknife. His only choice would be to let the car bounce off his side while he made a controlled deceleration.

I think truck's fault because....
First, the truck should not be in the fast lane, it's being passed by traffic, not passing traffic. He's too impatient.
Second, the truck intentionally speeds up to block the car. When it started the lane change, there was room. When you change lanes, you look sideways to be sure there's room, then you move over while looking forward. If someone speeds into the space and hits you from behind after you start the lane change, it's THEIR fault unless you slam on your brakes to make them hit you.
Third, the truck, trying to block the car, moves WAY too close to the next car, tailgating insanely. Watch the black car speed away terrified.
Fourth, the truck passes the car on the shoulder, them moves back into the lane slightly squashing it. The truck knew the car was there the whole time but just refused to brake.
Fifth, the truck was speeding. The truck speed limit is 10mph below the car speed limit on freeways, and the truck was going faster than the speeding cars, so almost certainly speeding by over 10mph.
Sixth, and indisputable, the trucker was on the phone, making him at fault as much as if he was drunk, no matter what he did driving.

As I see it, the car was less than safe, but the truck was an intentional dickhead that STARTED the film by driving badly, and ended with an accident he'll pay for. It's on film, he saw the car changing lanes and sped up to block it refusing to let her merge, passed it on the shoulder after it had passed him and entered the lane, and hit the car on purpose because he refused to hit his brakes/didn't want to be passed again. If I was on the jury, I would put it (EDIT)98% on the truck. He had every opportunity to avoid the accident by hitting the middle pedal just a little, but instead stood on the little pedal and seemingly thought to himself "Ramming speed!".