4 ms·
I don't understand what you mean. You seem to be implying that if a driver rear-ends you he can use his dash-cam to show you were at fault? Most places I've dri
by antiframe 4y ago
I don't understand what you mean. You seem to be implying that if a driver rear-ends you he can use his dash-cam to show you were at fault? Most places I've driven it is the following car's responsibility to maintain a safe distance which includes being able to stop if the car you are following suddenly stops. Yes, brake checking is a thing and could complicate any civil suit, but mechanical (now software) failure wouldn't be that.
- olyjohn 4y agoYeah they should be following further back. There's no excuse to rear-ending somebody. If your car can't stop as fast as a heavy-ass Tesla, you need to be following further back. If you hit someone brake checking you, you were following too close. You never know when someone might need to do a full, 100% brake slam to avoid something.
- userbinator 4y agoYou never know when someone might need to do a full, 100% brake slam to avoid something. I don't know about you, but I usually look beyond the car in front and possibly the one in front of that one too in order to anticipate braking. If it's all clear ahead and the one immediately in front suddenly brakes hard, I don't think it's clear that it isn't culpable.