Who's to blame here?

Mmm that’s a a dodgy one

Yep the guy is wrong for being on his phone whilst driving but the guy on the bike is not exactly in the right for distracting the driver which contributed to the accident

So basically both are complete idiots who are both to blame
 
The guy in the Golf. The root cause is him being on his phone. Everything after that is "effect."

"Cause and effect."
 
Well obviously the Golf as he's hit the car up the rear which is stationary. However I don't like the private policeman with the headcam. Goading the car is wrong, and I would argue is most definately a contributing factor.

However the whole "who is to blame" thing is what is wrong with modern life. Accidents happen, always have and always will. Looking for someone to blame is wrong.
 
Well obviously the Golf as he's hit the car up the rear which is stationary. However I don't like the private policeman with the headcam. Goading the car is wrong, and I would argue is most definately a contributing factor.

However the whole "who is to blame" thing is what is wrong with modern life. Accidents happen, always have and always will. Looking for someone to blame is wrong.

Was going to reply with something very similar.

Looking for blame is never productive, whether it be in things like this, at work or even with medical situations gone wrong. We could learn a lot from the airline industry, where although contributing factors to incidents are researched and discovered, individuals are not "personally blamed" and actually have immunity from repercussions if errors and mistakes are admitted and reported. This is how something as potentially dangerous as flying is made so safe because the lessons are learned and applied, where something that theoretically should be much safer, such as driving a car or having a routine medical op is not as safe because this practice is not applied.
 
Both are in the wrong. Self-proclaimed guardians of the roads on their bikes with head cameras which sure as hell don't get used when they go through red lights. Idiot drivers who use mobile phones. Hopefully the driver gets done, his insurance premiums go up etc. And the cyclist hits a nice pothole whilst riding on his own, goes arse over tit and loses a few teeth on the road.

I'd make a great judge.
 
Both are in the wrong. Self-proclaimed guardians of the roads on their bikes with head cameras which sure as hell don't get used when they go through red lights. Idiot drivers who use mobile phones. Hopefully the driver gets done, his insurance premiums go up etc. And the cyclist hits a nice pothole whilst riding on his own, goes arse over tit and loses a few teeth on the road.

I'd make a great judge.

You gotta pick a name though, is it:

1; Judge Shark
2; Judge Pathetic

Take your time now...?
 
Hmm tough one that. Can I ask the audience or a poll of 100 cyclists?
 
Mobile using motorist causes his vehicle to crash into another and there's reason to apportion blame elsewhere :unsure:...

Hands up anyone who hasn't lobbed some verbals at mobile using drivers....
 
Mobile using motorist causes his vehicle to crash into another and there's reason to apportion blame elsewhere :unsure:...

Hands up anyone who hasn't lobbed some verbals at mobile using drivers....

That's too simplistic.

The story is distracted driver causes his vehicle to crash into another.

The question is how much each factor contributed to the driver's distraction. Of course the motorist was in the wrong for using his phone, but the question that will never be answered is would the collision have happened if the cyclist didn't dish out his own form of vigilante justice? Any attention that the motorist has to pay to the cyclist is further distracting from driving, so the cyclist thinking he is making the roads safer, is actually making them more dangerous. None of this excuses the driver's phone usage, but 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Instead of apportioning blame we should be learning lessons, of which 2 of them are that the driver shouldn't be using his phone, and the cyclist shouldn't engage with the driver. If the cyclist had just recorded the incident and reported it, it is possible the crash wouldn't have occurred, the driver would still have been punished - which may or may not have changed their behaviour, and the innocent third party wouldn't have to deal with the hassle of getting rear-ended.
 
That's too simplistic.

The story is distracted driver causes his vehicle to crash into another.

The question is how much each factor contributed to the driver's distraction. Of course the motorist was in the wrong for using his phone, but the question that will never be answered is would the collision have happened if the cyclist didn't dish out his own form of vigilante justice? Any attention that the motorist has to pay to the cyclist is further distracting from driving, so the cyclist thinking he is making the roads safer, is actually making them more dangerous. None of this excuses the driver's phone usage, but 2 wrongs don't make a right.

Instead of apportioning blame we should be learning lessons, of which 2 of them are that the driver shouldn't be using his phone, and the cyclist shouldn't engage with the driver. If the cyclist had just recorded the incident and reported it, it is possible the crash wouldn't have occurred, the driver would still have been punished - which may or may not have changed their behaviour, and the innocent third party wouldn't have to deal with the hassle of getting rear-ended.

The driver didn’t have to respond to the cyclist. All he achieved was to further escalate the situation and distract himself.
 
I could be wrong here coz ave never met him. But is that Doon driving that Golf. Someone should tell him he is on the wrong forum.
PM from Fragger me finks 👍
 
Top