If you watch the animation again, there was a red car between the bikes and the stopped black car. The red car was blocking the view up until it changed lanes and now the bikers suddenly have to deal with an obstacle they couldnt possibly have known about.

These videos are definitely POE worthy.

Grey not red*

because you aren't supposed to stop your car in the middle of traffic unless it's unavoidable?

she also didnt have her hazards (blinking emergency lights) on according to court testimonies

Riskbreaker, I guess you're not a driver then, huh?

Ducklings aren't as important as the other human beings who are sharing the road with you.

This should be simple to figure out.

I am terrified that you might actually sympathize with somebody parking on a highway to save ducks.

The fact that it's a highway rather than a residential street is the defining point here.

Rewatched the video, missed the red car bit.

Of course. It's like saying "the fact that the plane crashed while parking rather than landing is the point here."

Ever seen a car parked on the road in front of a house? It's possible to stop a car tolerably safely on a residential road (though you still ought to pull over as far as possible), but stopping in a highway lane is just murderously crazy.

pretty sure you're wrong when it comes to accidents resulting in severe injury or death.

Regardless of what the law says, this was a very stupid thing to do. If legality is how you measure morality, it's hard to know what to say to you.Your 'what if' situation is bullshit, too: the only issue here is what actually happened, not what could have happened for imaginary reasons.

In Canada, perhaps, but not here in the US, at least, not in any state I've ever been to.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending what this woman did. It was reckless, foolish, dangerous, and resulted in the deaths of two people, but again, it's not 100% her fault...what if her car had just broken down instead? What if she slammed on her breaks because a deer or a person jumped out in front of her? Would it still be her fault? Would she still deserve life imprisonment for it then?

If you're going so fast so closely behind another vehicle that you don't have time to stop from rear ending it (much less, so hard that it results in death) then you're definitely not driving responsibly or within the intent of the law, and a resulting accident is on you. The freeway is no exception to this, and if you think it is, you've obviously never driven in rush hour traffic on a US freeway.

BorrowedSolution, where did I say legality is how I measure morality? How would you even draw that conclusion from what I said? God.

All I know is, I live in a large city where people drive on my ass at high speeds regularly. I also get cut off by people who don't use turn signals regularly. My break pedal gets used a lot. My "what if" situation is hardly bullshit, and I know the day one of those idiots slams into the back of me and maims/kills themselves, I sure as hell don't want to be blamed for it, because it's not my fault.

I do agree with you on one point though; that what she did was stupid.

it's also illegal to abandon your vehicle in the middle of the road, which is technically what this woman did by leaving it.

also you're wrong about the speed situation.

it's 100% possible in a situation where a leading vehicle swerves at the last moment to avoid a stationary one, leaving no time or space for any vehicle behind them to react.

so stop blaming the victims you ass.

"it's 100% possible in a situation where a leading vehicle swerves at the last moment to avoid a stationary one, leaving no time or space for any vehicle behind them to react."

So...then it was partially their fault like I've been saying? What?

No.

while being a douche you also mixed up having to stop because of an accident with stopping because you feel like it, to save some ducks.

that's the "unavoidable" caveat to these laws, you have to have no option or choice in the matter.

this woman made the choice to stop her perfectly functional vehicle, in a lane of traffic, to satisfy her personal desire.

I've lived in a number of countries and in most of them state that if you rear end someone then it's always your fault.

Rear ending someone implies them actually being IN the vehicle.

I'm pretty sure the law in Canada doesn't state that if you hit an empty vehicle parked in the middle of the road it's your fault.

She exercised poor judgment, and as a result, contributed to the deaths of two people.

But sentencing her to life in prison is just fucking stupid.

The "always your fault if you rear end someone" is an urban legend. You may be found faultless even if you rear end someone in any US jurisdiction, under some circumstances.

http://tbo.com/news/justices-second-driver-not-always-at-fault -in-rear-end-collision-573057

If you rear end someone in Winnipeg it is your fault, end of fucking story. Even if the road is covered in ice.

You should always leave enough space between yourself and the vehicle in front of you to stop if said vehicle is forced to stop immediately (or change lanes to avoid an accident). If you do not, you are a tailgating douche and are probably going to cause accidents.

She wasn't sentenced.

fuckin' a, people, it's not even reading comprehension, just listen to the damn words and understand them.

Meerkat, you're wrong.

Reverse into traffic and see how that excuse holds up in court.

The fact that she's eligible for life imprisonment, even if she almost certainly won't get it, is still an example of how stupid legal systems can be. And if she's eligible for life imprisonment, the sentence she does get will probably be too harsh.

for fuck sake.

the law doesn't get tailored to your special flower situation every time.

"criminal negligence causing death"

not

"wanting to save duckies but someone go killed boohoo"


And what's too harsh? Her actions caused the death of two people.

Fine, the fact that prosecutors are hoping to sentence her to life in prison.

It's still fucking stupid.

She made a mistake. Yes, she's guilty of causing two deaths. It wasn't malicious or predetermined. Furthermore, the dead man contributed to his own death by exceeding safe speed and not paying attention to the road in front of him. This woman doesn't deserve a life sentence.

Prosecutors want to send a message by pursuing the life sentence, they say. Great message.

SolRo, why the fuck would you reverse into traffic? That is not getting hit from behind, that is running into someone.

And I don't make the rules. I have been "victim" to the whole icy road making it impossible to stop and thus bumping into the guy in front of me. But in the end, the roads were icy and I should have ensured that I left enough space to not slide into that guy.

"SolRo, why the fuck would you reverse into traffic?"

because you passed some ducklings, and have to go back to help them. you uncaring monster.


Pretty sure the "at fault" shit is only for financial damages, criminal charges are separate.

What if Anita Sarkeesian had stopped her car for a pair of endangered lions?

Trick question, they would have been shot by a cheerleader, a symbol of the patriarchy.

Yes yes yes, but just "assuming" she stopped her car for lions and then got rear-ended by, let's say Boxxy, riding on a nanotube motorcycle. I want to know if the cops would be justified in beating Anita to death, or whether you'd all suddenly turn into a pack of bleeding heart libertarians and not give the innocent officers of peace the benefit of the doubt. Because oooooo, endangered lions, those are animals you could totally fursuit as! Not like lame stupid ducks, who are only good for Disney Afternoon porn art.

Another trick question, because any fursona I would use would also be half dragon, with a metal skeleton (NOT adamantium, that's STUPID), so even a duck-dragon would be totally badass.

Is Anita Sarkeesian white or black in this hypothetical scenario?

They are probably sipping victory Bellinis, endlessly rewatching their handiwork as we speak.

...i'm not sure why Bellini is the go-to cocktail for sociopathic ducklings in my head, but I can't imagine it any other way

Did you really name your cat after Anita Sarkeesian?

Yes and No. my friend and I collaborate on these rescues. I do the feeding and scooping, she pays the bills.

We sparred a long time over the name of this kitten. My original choice was LOKI. She came up with ANAHITA, a persian goddess. I agreed because it could be shortened to ANITA, which would be provocative on the internet, for exactly the reason you mentioned. Also, I like "LITTLE ANITA". To me it evokes Little Eva, who recorded the Loco-Motion in 1962. It's retro sexy sophisticated.

This little kitten came up to me when I took out the garbage 2 weeks ago. I think she's going to turn out to be crazy intelligent.

http://t.co/RzQn7jSqhB