You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
20

[–] Manowarthog 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

10/10 - if you rear end someone its your fault. Failure to follow at a safe distance.

0
7

[–] FilmMakingShitlord 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

My brother had a fatty back into him at an intersection. They counted it as rear ending even though he wasn't even moving. So not 10/10.

0
0

[–] Namaha ago  (edited ago)

Were they aware that the fatty backed into your brother? Or were they treating it as if your brother had rear-ended the fatty? Cause if it's the latter, it's still 10/10

Also your brother should invest in a dash cam if he hasn't already

0
3

[–] la_fupacabra 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

I KNEW IT. Stupid fucking hams

0
1

[–] eatbeasthater 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

The only time I can see rear ending not eventually ending up the rear-ender's fault is if witness statements and accounts detail the front-ender was driving aggressively and "brake-checking" the rear-ender, of whom would have been following at a safe distance.

But these fats were definitely not doing that.

0
1

[–] Athideus 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

If you are following at a safe distance, then you wouldn't rear end a break checker... It's literally the definition of a safe driving distance

0
0

[–] obesecheese ago 

Yep, in my state, context is irrelevant for rear endings, it's always the fault of the person in back.