From: AZ Nomad on
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 07:35:17 -0700, Conscience <nobama@g?> wrote:
>On 2010-04-18 07:17:44 -0700, russotto(a) (Matthew
>Russotto) said:

>> Yes, but they do not include "failing to be cut off by someone who
>> immediately brakes" nor "failing to keep a safe distance from the
>> vehicle to your rear". These pileups often include a lot of both.

>The only car accident I've ever been in was around 1987, and involved
>an idiot mother with loose kids in the back of her station wagon who
>jammed herself into my "following space", with no signal or apparent
>care. She immediately slammed on her brakes having midjudged the
>vehicle now in front of her, giving me two choices: Hit her, or leave
>the road and plow into a lot of brush. Due to those kids, I chose the
>latter, and sustained about $1K of damage.

>My fault, of course. (!) I've never regretted that decision but ever
>since, I watch for idiots trying to do likewise.

I've learned never to drive faster than I can see ahead. That means
that if conditions are slippery and I'm approaching a blind turn,
I slow down. I have almost no sympathy for people who run
into road debris like fallen trees or rocks. If you can't see it in
time you're driving blind. It also includes the car in front of you and
anything that car might do.
From: Matthew Russotto on
In article <slrnhsm5vs.k9m.aznomad.3(a)>,
AZ Nomad <aznomad.3(a)PremoveOBthisOX.COM> wrote:
>I'm talking about people who run into the car in front of them. If somebody
>ahead immediately brakes, then you brake and stop. They won't have any more
>braking ability than you. If you run into them then you were following too
>close, probably making contact before even noticing that the vehicle ahead had
>slowed down.

What are you, GPSMan? If you're driving along with a reasonable
following distance behind the car in front of you, and the driver of a
car in the next lane (who may in fact be driving more slowly than you
are) notices the car ahead of him slowing, panics, and swerves into
your lane, your following distance has now been cut; you may hit him
(or someone else) regardless of what action you take. This scenario is
likely repeated many times in any given pileup.

Furthermore, even if you kept adequate following distance and no such
thing happened, you could be slowing, get hit from behind, and be
literally pushed into the car in front of you. This scenario, also,
is likely repeated many times in any given pileup.

You talk about "personal responsibility", yet you attempt to enforce
it with blanket rules like
"every *single* [sic] who so much as touches the bumper of the leading
car in one of those pileups should get an 8 point reckless driving

Personal responsibility requires individual evaluation of
responsibility. Blanket rules like that are the antithesis of
_personal_ responsibility.
The problem with socialism is there's always
someone with less ability and more need.