If you’re going by the book you should never be following another car closely enough that you can’t stop in time to avoid a collision, even if they come to a full stop unexpectedly.
You clearly misunderstood the point of mentioning being rear ended, which wasn’t that I’d be rear ending you, but instead the dumbass who doesn’t know that. It was really a warning about property damage to your own car from stopping unnecessarily, which is why I mentioned legal and actual fault since we’re discussing California.
And no, being rear ended is not an automatic “they should have been further away,” including potentially in this circumstance. Full stop in a travel lane on an interstate and report back on your fault determination if you survive.
What is it about driving that makes threads personal? The person was totally wrong in a heavily-read forum is all, and that’s your cue to put me in my place for pointing it out or something?
I looked it up for California and the best I could find is that if someone stops or slows inappropriately they could bear partial blame. Partial as in not all of it, so some of the blame stays on the person doing the rear ending. To me this infers that you are not following the book if you don't leave enough space to stop in time.
>What is it about driving that makes threads personal?
How did I make this personal? By using the pronoun "you"? I was doing that in a general sense and not targeted, which I thought you were doing as well in your own post.
> And no, being rear ended is not an automatic “they should have been further away,” including potentially in this circumstance. Full stop in a travel lane on an interstate and report back on your fault determination if you survive.
You're surprised that interstates are a special case?
> What is it about driving that makes threads personal? The person was totally wrong in a heavily-read forum is all, and that’s your cue to put me in my place for pointing it out or something?
Yeah, you just wandered in and started telling people that they were Wrong, and that even if legally they were in the right they were still Wrong; I can't imagine why anyone would take issue.
You’re arguing from a point of misunderstanding. Pedestrian triggered cross walks these days have signs that only flash while occupied and have signs that warn drivers again by flashing, ahead of the crosswalk.
