Comments by "Auntie M" (@auntiem873) on "Dashcam Lessons" channel.

4:31 - didn’t the car recording do the exact same thing? Turning from the wrong lane. They were just lucky enough to not have someone next to them like the first car did.
18
How can you be on the car’s side? His lane ended. Instead of turning he goes straight. The truck had the right of way. If the truck hit him it would have been the cars fault for failure to yield.
4
Because if you keep letting them merge in areas where they are not suppose to, they never learn their lesson. Do not let them merge when they have a yield sign. Make it known that you can’t force your way in at that location, the people traveling it will not let you. If you can’t handle that, go a different route. I get that insurance companies will say you’re in the wrong. I don’t care. I can also sue the other driver for not boating the law and causing the accident. And for some reason, people who do this usually do not carry insurance. Which should be a surprise cause they also don’t know the rules of the road either. Take them to court and if they don’t have insurance it’s an automatic win cause you’re not suppose to be on the road without it. Making that guy at fault even if he didn’t cause the accident.
2
@ITBOILSMYBLOOD - I’m not blaming the cammer for speeding up. I’m not blaming the truck for speeding up. All I am saying is the car was in the wrong, when it said I was almost run off the road. It was not run off the road. The cars lane ended. The car failed to yield when it moved over. I know this because the car almost hit the curb because it did not follow the lane and turn right. The lane ended for that lane. It did not go straight. I know this, again, the curb in front of the car. So the truck could have been going fast or slow. It doesn’t matter. They had control of the lane. They were in the lane. The car was not. So how could the car have been almost run off the road? They failed to yield, they failed to check if the space was open when they changed lanes - in the middle of the intersection, which again is wrong. The truck is fine, it’s the car that everyone seems to be protecting. When it is the cars fault.
2
No they are not. Some do it that way but those are the ones who get hit and killed by drivers who say the didn’t see him cause stop signs are on the side of the road. This sign turners usually stay on the side of the road so they can run if a car doesn’t stop.
1
@ - 1) I can tell your not from the states. 2) the law says a safe distance while driving true, depending on the speed you are going. The rule is 1 car length for every 10 MPH you are going. As for stopping there is a specific distance as well, 6 feet. Most people cannot figure that out while behind the wheel so the instructor and some driving manuals will say stop before you loose sight of the tire and the road. It really does depend on the height of booths vehicles. As such the law stays at 6 feet. It also says you must yield at yield signs and traffic that is already on the road you want to be on. If you watch this video again, the truck was traveling at the proper distance maybe a little further back which is why this guy thought he could squeeze in. He shouldn’t have. He was in the wrong. Only insurance companies say that the driver needs to avoid an accident when possible. The last chance doctrine which the insurance companies got passed in some states, says you have to try to avoid an accident. Only here we can see the other vehicle trying to bully their way in, they could have avoided the accident by slowing down and pulling in behind the man once it became clear he was not giving up his spot. The other car had broken 2 laws while the OP 1. The last chance doctrine. Which a Judge does not have to apply if it is found that the other vehicle broke the law before the accident happened. A good lawyer would argue this. Sadly a lot of lawyers do not want to argue the case in traffic court cause there is no money. As well as most people do not have the time or money to pursue it. But if OP wanted to sue the other driver under this and sue for a lot of money, punitive damages, the frustration of points on their license based on what the insurance companies say, the increase of premiums (if any), the deductible for fixing his vehicle or getting the money back that the insurance paid out so far, to lawyer, bringing his premiums to what he was paying before the accident, the time off work, the frustration of having to find another way to work, the rental of a vehicle, the suffering from the teasing or yelling from coworkers, spouse, lawyers would argue this and probably win. That’s because once the law is broken, everything that happens after that is the fault of the one who broke the law in the first place. This is what use to happen in the past up to the 70’s and 80’s when insurance became mandatory and cases like this dropped. But the laws are still there and the insurance companies are taking advantage of them instead of private citizens. It’s called complaisance and the insurance company and Courts love it. So just to recap, you do not have to let a car in just because they want in and they are coming from a side street as well as a yield sign.
1
Blaze Clarke - the car should have exited at the first turn but went straight. It didn’t turn at the second one either and was blocking the lane for the car in front to get over. On a round about you are suppose to stay out of the outside lane until your exit then move over. That is what the car I. Front tried to do. They assumed the car in the outside lane had turned and so without checking moved over. That’s when they realized there was a car and swerved to avoid it. They also slammed on the breaks. That’s when the camer turned to avoid the rear ender. However, he was in the wrong lane for that turn. And from his attitude it seems like he wanted that turn anyway. It would have put him in the wrong lane to make the turn then. So him getting mad at the car in front of him doesn’t make sense. The car in front tried to do it right but couldn’t. The camer was following the car in front and did make the turn and was mad cause he was following a bit close but still managed to make the turn. Albeit , from the wrong lane.
1
The amount of people who are driving. It don’t know or forgot the rules of the road are crazy. They were taught that just because you have your signal on doesn’t make it so other drivers have to let you in. Yet someone told them on the internet that it does so, that’s what they believe now. Not the driver’s hand book, not the person who taught them but some stranger on the internet. They probably believe an undercover cop has to tell you they’re a cop when asked.
1
@ITBOILSMYBLOOD - I’m NOT on the cars side. The car is saying that the truck ran them off the road. I’m saying the truck did NOT. The cars lane ended and the car failed to notice and it failed to yield to the other lane. It just decided to go over leaving the truck to speed up.
1
@ITBOILSMYBLOOD - true but he didn’t. That still does not qualify for “I was nearly run off the road.” The car failed to notice what was happening and just assumed other would let him in instead of understanding that he was the one that needed to yield or get over sooner.
1
@ITBOILSMYBLOOD - you can go the speed limit and still get a ticket for impeding traffic. The fact is the cars lane ended. He should have moved over sooner. Instead they felt that because their lane ended, traffic HAD to let them in the lane. They do not. The fact that you fail to understand this tells me you may need a drivers education refresher course.
1
I love how people think that just because they have their blinker on, it means, you have to let them over.
1