3 ms·

That's why I linked to an article where a woman went to jail for stopping on the freeway for a small animal. There is a problem with braking, and it's not alway

That's why I linked to an article where a woman went to jail for stopping on the freeway for a small animal. There is a problem with braking, and it's not always the fault of the car behind you if they hit you. The law disagrees with you, and that's what matters.

DanBC 9y ago
> There is a problem with braking, and it's not always the fault of the car behind you if they hit you. The driver is too close if they cannot stop in time. It's not complicated. It is always the following driver's fault, unless the car in front has defective brake lights.
- freehunter 9y ago
  You guys keep saying that like your opinion on the law outweighs that of a judge. It obviously is not always the following driver's fault, or that woman wouldn't have gone to jail. You're wrong. It doesn't matter your argument. I provided proof that you're wrong and you're still arguing your wrong argument wrongly and continuing to be wrong. You can argue with me until I give up and then you can declare victory but you're still wrong, and not only that, you're completely oblivious to the idea that you're wrong. The fact that a woman went to jail for literally this exact thing proves that you are wrong. Hopefully that makes it clear, even to those of you who didn't read the link that I took the time to find and provide to you. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you're so obviously wrong and yet still arguing against the law that I feel like I have to make it very clear that you are wrong. Go back and read the link I provided. You're wrong.
  - icc97 9y ago
    She wasn't braking. She was parked. The car was stopped, there were no brake lights. She had no hazard lights on.
icc97 9y ago
The article is about a woman literally parking on the freeway and trying to ferry ducks off the road. There is a significant difference between that and braking sharply.

DanBC 9y ago

> There is a problem with braking, and it's not always the fault of the car behind you if they hit you. The driver is too close if they cannot stop in time. It's not complicated. It is always the following driver's fault, unless the car in front has defective brake lights.

freehunter 9y ago
You guys keep saying that like your opinion on the law outweighs that of a judge. It obviously is not always the following driver's fault, or that woman wouldn't have gone to jail. You're wrong. It doesn't matter your argument. I provided proof that you're wrong and you're still arguing your wrong argument wrongly and continuing to be wrong. You can argue with me until I give up and then you can declare victory but you're still wrong, and not only that, you're completely oblivious to the idea that you're wrong. The fact that a woman went to jail for literally this exact thing proves that you are wrong. Hopefully that makes it clear, even to those of you who didn't read the link that I took the time to find and provide to you. I'm not trying to be a jerk, but you're so obviously wrong and yet still arguing against the law that I feel like I have to make it very clear that you are wrong. Go back and read the link I provided. You're wrong.
- icc97 9y ago
  She wasn't braking. She was parked. The car was stopped, there were no brake lights. She had no hazard lights on.

icc97 9y ago

The article is about a woman literally parking on the freeway and trying to ferry ducks off the road. There is a significant difference between that and braking sharply.