I don't know why you want to send me a drill bit check... but, ok! If you're sure you want to, then my mailing address is: Jesse Bowers PO Box 880841 San Diego Ca 92168
judge... ignores non-turn signaling, stop sign running, motorcycle in the middle of an intersection, followed by destruction of property. judge also thinks there is a 'van' involved in the case and feels beer should be awarded.
the pt cruiser(van), has a massive a-pillar blind spot, the driver has the sun in his eyes, and likely wasn't expecting (although he should, and have his head on a swivel) a bike to be in the intersection, (driver didn't 'cut the corner'), although he may have in the past given the DS front fender dent.
If the rider valued his safety at all he'd have on more than a t-shirt, an followed the law, or the law of self preservation. (or an evasive maneuver perhaps)
I love the site, wish you'd be more open to the 'other side' from the comments. but as you've said, (rightly so) its your site, you do you.
ummm, well, you brought up a good point about the A pillar, and that is possible I concede. I do think that the PT Cruiser ought to have seen the biker, as he wasn't moving, and in my experience, the distance the PT Cruiser moved changes the blind spot the A pillar has, so, the driver should have seen the biker long before he got close. Frankly, the driver IS responsible for what he runs into. Also, there is a DENT in that drivers side fender before he hit the biker! HA! I bet you didn't notice that! Yes, the biker is over the limit line, but not "in the middle of the intersection" True the sun is in the drivers eyes... I concede that too. I hadn't noticed that I offer that I have given my view, my opinion, and it seems that being "more open" to differing views and opinions would indicate I have no conviction in my beliefs. I will be more open to all other views and beliefs on the blog of whoever disagrees with me where I can be the one who is critical of their opinion. THEN you can see how that turns out. How about that compromise? and thank you for the compliment !
its all good, I did see the the 'biker tally' on the fender, thats why I mentioned it he may have not be the most attentive driver in the past. also those wide angle cameras (GoPro and the like) give a false sense of perspective. that tanker truck was blocking the biker from his view, (if you can see the PT he can't see you) and the pt guy was checking for oncoming traffic before proceeding. my broke bones side with the biker as i've been on THAT end of the car a few times, and I reacted similar without the armored gloves and property damage when I was hit (1st amend beat down tho) . but honestly in those moments, if I had the gear I would have likely done the same (and would have to live with those actions) . not saying anyone is right or wrong. we all are both. all the time. but that driver no doubt hit that biker. can't wait for the next post J. keep it up.
Way past the limit line.
ReplyDeleteAnd on to another subject, I got my $8 Stanley drill bit check yesterday. How do I get it to you?
I don't know why you want to send me a drill bit check... but, ok! If you're sure you want to, then my mailing address is:
DeleteJesse Bowers
PO Box 880841
San Diego Ca 92168
judge...
ReplyDeleteignores
non-turn signaling, stop sign running, motorcycle in the middle of an intersection, followed by destruction of property.
judge also thinks there is a 'van' involved in the case and feels beer should be awarded.
the pt cruiser(van), has a massive a-pillar blind spot, the driver has the sun in his eyes, and likely wasn't expecting (although he should, and have his head on a swivel) a bike to be in the intersection, (driver didn't 'cut the corner'), although he may have in the past given the DS front fender dent.
If the rider valued his safety at all he'd have on more than a t-shirt, an followed the law, or the law of self preservation. (or an evasive maneuver perhaps)
I love the site, wish you'd be more open to the 'other side' from the comments. but as you've said, (rightly so) its your site, you do you.
ummm, well, you brought up a good point about the A pillar, and that is possible I concede. I do think that the PT Cruiser ought to have seen the biker, as he wasn't moving, and in my experience, the distance the PT Cruiser moved changes the blind spot the A pillar has, so, the driver should have seen the biker long before he got close. Frankly, the driver IS responsible for what he runs into.
DeleteAlso, there is a DENT in that drivers side fender before he hit the biker! HA! I bet you didn't notice that!
Yes, the biker is over the limit line, but not "in the middle of the intersection"
True the sun is in the drivers eyes... I concede that too. I hadn't noticed that
I offer that I have given my view, my opinion, and it seems that being "more open" to differing views and opinions would indicate I have no conviction in my beliefs.
I will be more open to all other views and beliefs on the blog of whoever disagrees with me where I can be the one who is critical of their opinion.
THEN you can see how that turns out.
How about that compromise?
and thank you for the compliment !
its all good, I did see the the 'biker tally' on the fender, thats why I mentioned it he may have not be the most attentive driver in the past. also those wide angle cameras (GoPro and the like) give a false sense of perspective. that tanker truck was blocking the biker from his view, (if you can see the PT he can't see you) and the pt guy was checking for oncoming traffic before proceeding. my broke bones side with the biker as i've been on THAT end of the car a few times, and I reacted similar without the armored gloves and property damage when I was hit (1st amend beat down tho) . but honestly in those moments, if I had the gear I would have likely done the same (and would have to live with those actions) . not saying anyone is right or wrong. we all are both. all the time. but that driver no doubt hit that biker. can't wait for the next post J. keep it up.
ReplyDelete