FSCKING OLD PPL CANNOT DRIVE!! Got into accident.

[mAdD INDIAN]

Prologue;
I'm in Boston right now staying with my uncle (in Cambridge). He took us to show us his new house that he bought in Sudbury. The accdient occured on the way back.

Main Event;
We were on I-95 taking the exit on I-90 when we saw a Taurus stopped RIGHT AT THE FSCKING EXIT RAMP! And it wasn't off by teh shoulder..oh no..it in the lane! And the hazards weren't even on!! We saw the car just as we passed a corner and my uncle slowed down and was about to pass it when we got hit by a lady in her RX300. Luckily he didn't hit the Taurus in front! Now nothing happened to RX300 but we got some damage to the back of his '95 Galant (trunk wont' close, likely frame damage, needs new bumper/fender). My uncle luckily saved that Taurus as they came out untouched. They didnt' even know something happened until we told them. Mind you, they were rigth at the base of the exit ramp on the highway! Stopped! We asked them why u were stopped right here, the old guy said 'we missed the exit'. He didn't even know an accident occured right behind him! So I told him next time if you ever miss an exit, follow thru wiht it...dont' STOP RIGHT AT THE RAMP! Luckily my uncle swerved around them or else they woudl have been hit!

Legally, the lady behind us will probably get the blame, but it's really that old couple's fault. Oh ya, after we talked to them, we told them to move up so they cuase another accident and they just drove away! Luckily we have their license plate, but I doubt they would get in trouble legally.

To add on top of this, my uncle is supposed to close the house deal tomorrow, so he's pretty stressed as it is!

 

[kyutip]

I think you should consult a lawyer about this.
Probably you don't have the reason to sue the Taurus but the RX300 probably want to.
The Taurus to some extent cause the accident to happen, although the RX300 should not have hit you anyway.

Sorry about your uncle's car

 

[Ime]

I've seen my share of idiot drivers do this, and not all of them were old.

 

[Cyberian]

Originally posted by: kyutip
I think you should consult a lawyer about this.
Probably you don't have the reason to sue the Taurus but the RX300 probably want to.
The Taurus to some extent cause the accident to happen, although the RX300 should not have hit you anyway.

Sorry about your uncle's car

I think the chances of a successful lawsuit when you hit someone in the rear are slim to none.
And Slim just left town.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: kyutip
I think you should consult a lawyer about this.
Probably you don't have the reason to sue the Taurus but the RX300 probably want to.
The Taurus to some extent cause the accident to happen, although the RX300 should not have hit you anyway.

Sorry about your uncle's car

Who said anything about a lawsuit? We aren't looking to screw anyone over! It's just that the driver of the Taurus shoudl realize that he caused this to occur! He was oblivious to what happened. And he should count his lucky stars that he didn't get hit!

Ime: Your right, it was wrong to generalize. But thats what came to mind in the beginning.

 

[Kelemvor]

I think people should have to take another driving test when you hit a certain age. That's one of the major problems with the Driving system is that you ahve to take a driving test to get a lisence, but then you never have to prove that you can still drive later in life. THere's so many elderly people out there that can barely walk, talk, and get aroudn but they hop in their car and go out driving. Something really should be done.

 

[Mallow]

No matter what if you are rear ended it is not your fault. You could be a total moron and slam on your breaks for no reason and it would still be their fault for "following too close". Or at least that's the law in texas.

 

[Ylen13]

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
I think people should have to take another driving test when you hit a certain age. That's one of the major problems with the Driving system is that you ahve to take a driving test to get a lisence, but then you never have to prove that you can still drive later in life. THere's so many elderly people out there that can barely walk, talk, and get aroudn but they hop in their car and go out driving. Something really should be done.

we need to redo our dmv driving test. It don't really matter if you are old or yound, the test that you take is to easy and to many people get on the road that just don't belong there, i know couple of them. Also it's a joke when 16 year old is required to do 50 hours of driving with his parents and no way can dmv verify if really did the driving with this parents or not as parents just have to sign that they did it with out even doing it.

back on topic

yes it's kind old couple fault but also the driver that hit u fault, if she would have folllow far enough from u to see that u stopped she would have time to change lanes, or to stop her self and avoid the accident in the process

 

[bolido2000]

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
I think people should have to take another driving test when you hit a certain age. That's one of the major problems with the Driving system is that you ahve to take a driving test to get a lisence, but then you never have to prove that you can still drive later in life. THere's so many elderly people out there that can barely walk, talk, and get aroudn but they hop in their car and go out driving. Something really should be done.

we need to redo our dmv driving test. It don't really matter if you are old or yound, the test that you take is to easy and to many people get on the road that just don't belong there, i know couple of them. Also it's a joke when 16 year old is required to do 50 hours of driving with his parents and no way can dmv verify if really did the driving with this parents or not as parents just have to sign that they did it with out even doing it.

back on topic

yes it's kind old couple fault but also the driver that hit u fault, if she would have folllow far enough from u to see that u stopped she would have time to change lanes, or to stop her self and avoid the accident in the process

In my Poli Sci class we saw a video of 20/20. The old farts lobbying group is one of the most powerful ones in DC. You can touch old people cuz they are the main group that votes. Is simply a political suicide to pass legislations that affect them like SS and driving tests

 

[HappyPuppy]

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
I think people should have to take another driving test when you hit a certain age. That's one of the major problems with the Driving system is that you ahve to take a driving test to get a lisence, but then you never have to prove that you can still drive later in life. THere's so many elderly people out there that can barely walk, talk, and get aroudn but they hop in their car and go out driving. Something really should be done.

we need to redo our dmv driving test. It don't really matter if you are old or yound, the test that you take is to easy and to many people get on the road that just don't belong there, i know couple of them. Also it's a joke when 16 year old is required to do 50 hours of driving with his parents and no way can dmv verify if really did the driving with this parents or not as parents just have to sign that they did it with out even doing it.

back on topic

yes it's kind old couple fault but also the driver that hit u fault, if she would have folllow far enough from u to see that u stopped she would have time to change lanes, or to stop her self and avoid the accident in the process

I was going to make a nasty post until I read yours. You nailed it, Bud. The old people shouldn't have stopped, but the person who caused the accident was the one who rearended the Indian.

If you want to get into statistics, younguns cause far more accidents than old folks. Maybe we should retest those in their teens and early twenties every 6 month at a fee of $100. If they want to drive and continue bringing mayhem to the public roads then they should pay.

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
I think people should have to take another driving test when you hit a certain age. That's one of the major problems with the Driving system is that you ahve to take a driving test to get a lisence, but then you never have to prove that you can still drive later in life. THere's so many elderly people out there that can barely walk, talk, and get aroudn but they hop in their car and go out driving. Something really should be done.

we need to redo our dmv driving test. It don't really matter if you are old or yound, the test that you take is to easy and to many people get on the road that just don't belong there, i know couple of them. Also it's a joke when 16 year old is required to do 50 hours of driving with his parents and no way can dmv verify if really did the driving with this parents or not as parents just have to sign that they did it with out even doing it.

back on topic

yes it's kind old couple fault but also the driver that hit u fault, if she would have folllow far enough from u to see that u stopped she would have time to change lanes, or to stop her self and avoid the accident in the process

I was going to make a nasty post until I read yours. You nailed it, Bud. The old people shouldn't have stopped, but the person who caused the accident was the one who rearended the Indian.

If you want to get into statistics, younguns cause far more accidents than old folks. Maybe we should retest those in their teens and early twenties every 6 month at a fee of $100. If they want to drive and continue bringing mayhem to the public roads then they should pay.

Here in Ontario, we have to take three exams till we get our proper driver's license. I'll break it down for you guys:

First we have a G1 - the restrictions are that you cannot drive alone or after midnight and before 5AM. Also you cannot drive on the highway. In order to get a G1, you have to take a written test.

Then we have a G2. This is a driving test (which depending on who your tester is..can be quite hard..or very easy..its sad how un-consistent it is). You have to wait one year after your G1 to take the G2..or 8 months if you went to driving school. With a G2 you are allowed to drive alone and at anytime..but you cannot have any alcholol in your body.

Finally you get your G. This is your final test, on which they take you on your highway. You can only take your G, after you've had your G2 for a year.

And you only have 5 years after you get yoru G1 to complete the process.

 

[Theslowone]

I have heard that it doesn't matter on the interstate(or offramp for that matter) that you are not allowed to stop for any reason other then traffic stopping, or you are about to die. On I26 a man dropped a cig into his lap, stopped and someone hit him, he got the ticket.

 

[Ylen13]

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
I think people should have to take another driving test when you hit a certain age. That's one of the major problems with the Driving system is that you ahve to take a driving test to get a lisence, but then you never have to prove that you can still drive later in life. THere's so many elderly people out there that can barely walk, talk, and get aroudn but they hop in their car and go out driving. Something really should be done.

we need to redo our dmv driving test. It don't really matter if you are old or yound, the test that you take is to easy and to many people get on the road that just don't belong there, i know couple of them. Also it's a joke when 16 year old is required to do 50 hours of driving with his parents and no way can dmv verify if really did the driving with this parents or not as parents just have to sign that they did it with out even doing it.

back on topic

yes it's kind old couple fault but also the driver that hit u fault, if she would have folllow far enough from u to see that u stopped she would have time to change lanes, or to stop her self and avoid the accident in the process

I was going to make a nasty post until I read yours. You nailed it, Bud. The old people shouldn't have stopped, but the person who caused the accident was the one who rearended the Indian.

If you want to get into statistics, younguns cause far more accidents than old folks. Maybe we should retest those in their teens and early twenties every 6 month at a fee of $100. If they want to drive and continue bringing mayhem to the public roads then they should pay.

Here in Ontario, we have to take three exams till we get our proper driver's license. I'll break it down for you guys:

First we have a G1 - the restrictions are that you cannot drive alone or after midnight and before 5AM. Also you cannot drive on the highway. In order to get a G1, you have to take a written test.

Then we have a G2. This is a driving test (which depending on who your tester is..can be quite hard..or very easy..its sad how un-consistent it is). You have to wait one year after your G1 to take the G2..or 8 months if you went to driving school. With a G2 you are allowed to drive alone and at anytime..but you cannot have any alcholol in your body.

Finally you get your G. This is your final test, on which they take you on your highway. You can only take your G, after you've had your G2 for a year.

And you only have 5 years after you get yoru G1 to complete the process.

wow that is a long process.

little bit confused about the g1. If i have g1 and i have someone over 25 with valid driving licences in my car, am i still not able to drive after midnight and highway?

 

[Ylen13]

Originally posted by: Theslowone
I have heard that it doesn't matter on the interstate(or offramp for that matter) that you are not allowed to stop for any reason other then traffic stopping, or you are about to die. On I26 a man dropped a cig into his lap, stopped and someone hit him, he got the ticket.

yes technically the old couple could get a ticket for illegally stopping but that is not the most relevent in this situation. If instead of them stopping, the car could have just broken down as it happen alot of times and they where just sitting waiting for police/tow to show up and help them. The resutl would have been the same the women would have hit the car infront of her anyway as she was following to closely, not paying attention or both

 

[malbojah]

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN
Prologue;
I'm in Boston right now staying with my uncle (in Cambridge).
Main Event;
We were on I-95 taking the exit on I-90 when we saw a Taurus stopped RIGHT AT THE FSCKING EXIT RAMP! And it wasn't off by teh shoulder..oh no..it in the lane!

Yeah, getting on the Pike from any interstate seems to be a problem. As though the onramps had no thought of any kind put into them

 

[trek]

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: mAdD INDIAN

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy

Originally posted by: Ylen13

Originally posted by: FrankyJunior
I think people should have to take another driving test when you hit a certain age. That's one of the major problems with the Driving system is that you ahve to take a driving test to get a lisence, but then you never have to prove that you can still drive later in life. THere's so many elderly people out there that can barely walk, talk, and get aroudn but they hop in their car and go out driving. Something really should be done.

we need to redo our dmv driving test. It don't really matter if you are old or yound, the test that you take is to easy and to many people get on the road that just don't belong there, i know couple of them. Also it's a joke when 16 year old is required to do 50 hours of driving with his parents and no way can dmv verify if really did the driving with this parents or not as parents just have to sign that they did it with out even doing it.

back on topic

yes it's kind old couple fault but also the driver that hit u fault, if she would have folllow far enough from u to see that u stopped she would have time to change lanes, or to stop her self and avoid the accident in the process

I was going to make a nasty post until I read yours. You nailed it, Bud. The old people shouldn't have stopped, but the person who caused the accident was the one who rearended the Indian.

If you want to get into statistics, younguns cause far more accidents than old folks. Maybe we should retest those in their teens and early twenties every 6 month at a fee of $100. If they want to drive and continue bringing mayhem to the public roads then they should pay.

Here in Ontario, we have to take three exams till we get our proper driver's license. I'll break it down for you guys:

First we have a G1 - the restrictions are that you cannot drive alone or after midnight and before 5AM. Also you cannot drive on the highway. In order to get a G1, you have to take a written test.

Then we have a G2. This is a driving test (which depending on who your tester is..can be quite hard..or very easy..its sad how un-consistent it is). You have to wait one year after your G1 to take the G2..or 8 months if you went to driving school. With a G2 you are allowed to drive alone and at anytime..but you cannot have any alcholol in your body.

Finally you get your G. This is your final test, on which they take you on your highway. You can only take your G, after you've had your G2 for a year.

And you only have 5 years after you get yoru G1 to complete the process.

wow that is a long process.

little bit confused about the g1. If i have g1 and i have someone over 25 with valid driving licences in my car, am i still not able to drive after midnight and highway?

I don't think so, least thats the way it works out in BC...cept it's called an 'L' for leaner. G2 is called 'N' for new driver. We also have to have a red L or green N in the back of our vehicles here

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: Ylen13


wow that is a long process.

little bit confused about the g1. If i have g1 and i have someone over 25 with valid driving licences in my car, am i still not able to drive after midnight and highway?

First off, you cannot drive with your G1 unless you ahve someone with a valid G license for over 3 years. And even if they are in the car, you cannot drive on the highway or after midnight (altho many still do).

Also if the car was broken down, the person would have gone off to the shoulder, or atleast as far as they can! And they would put their hazards on, at the very least.

This person did not do either!!! They didnt' have their hazards on!! So it was hard to tell if they were completely stopped or moving, until the very end!

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Ime
I've seen my share of idiot drivers do this, and not all of them were old.

agreed.

old drivers do need to be retested in my opinion, but this incident isn't evidence to that.

this driver probably did the same thing when he was young.

 

[Nyical]

FSCKING YOUNG PPL CANNOT DRIVE!!



FSCKING I CANNOT TYPE!!

 

[mAdD INDIAN]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold

Originally posted by: Ime
I've seen my share of idiot drivers do this, and not all of them were old.

agreed.

old drivers do need to be retested in my opinion, but this incident isn't evidence to that.

this driver probably did the same thing when he was young.

I know I was wrong to make the generalization of old people. It was the first thing to come to my mind though. But I still stand by it, becuase I can't see anyone else not being oblivious to what's around them and just stopping right there in the exit withouht their hazards on.

 

[Demon-Xanth]

The biggest difference that I see in old people and young people, is that young people will at least REALIZE that they did something wrong. Old people don't.

My first car got totaled by an old guy who didn't see me as he accelerated THROUGH me in a parking lot.

My brother in law had a car fixed from an accident, not even a week later some old guy in a van backs up, munches up the side that was just fixed, gets out, takes a look, and drives off. If someone hadn't written down the license plate he would've gotten away with it and my brother in law would've had to pay the deductible. The cops didn't want to charge him with a hit and run because it was an old guy. So basically, the statistic got lost.

There's no sympathy for the young, but there is for the old.

 

[rh71]

This happened on the right lane just before an exit ramp while I was in the left lane of a 3-lane highway. A big-as$ semi was following the vehicle in the right lane when they suddently hit the brakes HARD for whatever reason... (maybe undecided about taking the exit or not)... the semi had no choice but to jump in the middle lane.

I swear if there were a car in the middle lane, they would've been crushed by the semi... and possibly right into me in the left lane. THere wasn't even a shoulder (but a concrete barrier) in the middle of a small overpass bridge.

I swear it would've been a very fatal accident that day because of that stupid vehicle who decided to try and stop in front of a semi while we're all going 65.

 

[Doggiedog]

I'll say old people can't drive but alot of other people can't either.

I was on the on ramp to the George Washington Bridge in NYC in rush hour when the idiot in front of me, some 30'ish hispanic guy, stopped his car and tried to reverse. It was a single lane with no shoulders just jam packed with cars behind me. Apparently, the guy missed the off ramp and didn't want to go over the bridge so he decided to force his way back. The jerk wouldn't move for a few minutes and left it in reverse. After finally being able to get around him I cursed him out but he also cursed me out too. Some people are such idiots.

 

[Spac3d]

Uh, so what did the cop say?

 

[GasX]

if there is a minimum speed for that highway, then the person at fault would be the old guy who stopped on the highway.