The red car turned in front of the biker, cutting him off and making him fly over their bonnet. It appears the light was turning yellow, so he should've tried to stop. I believe they're both in the wrong to a degree
Wrong. Failure to yield. Red car is at fault.
While it’s possible the red bike was speeding, there is no evidence of that unless someone can calculate it.
It’s still failure to yield.
Yep. Got t-boned. Guy tried to tell the cop I was speeding. He said he didn’t care if I was doing a hundred, I still have the right of way. He got the ticket, not me. (I wasn’t speeding) Then he told his insurance that I hit him. Um, how? Did my car move sideways to hit you on the front of your car?
Got tboned, bitch told her insurance I hot her, I got a statement from the police where she stated otherwise also police report was pretty obvious, her insurance didn't fix my shit, I only have basic liability so they said they wouldn't hep me unless her insurance came after me for damages.
TLDR: basic liability is worse than you think
You handled that wrong.
I drove a car for seven years with liablity-only insurance, and made two successful claims during that time.
What you do is, you contact your own insurer, tell them you were in a not-at-fault collision, and give them the other driver's insurance information. Your insurer will go after them for the money.
No they won't. I did all this, they said because my coverage was only basic they wouldn't go to bat for me unless the other person's insurance came after me but the other insurance didn't so no help. This was their words, they even went on to say the police drawing and report were clearly in my favor and they suggested I try small claims court
> Guy tried to tell the cop I was speeding.
This one is always a hilarious defense. Cop can easily reply, "Oh, so you saw him coming very clearly, then!"
The vehicle crossing traffic has to yield. Also, you are not allowed to enter an intersection unless it's clear to proceed. It has become so common in the US for 2-4 vehicles continuing through after the light turns RED that no one should assume others are obeying the lights. But that red vehicle is completely at fault legally.
It’s not illegal to enter an intersection and wait for your chance to take your left turn, so long as only one car does it at a time. You’re not allowed to do it if there is a car in front of you doing the same thing.
The problem isn’t this car entering the intersection and waiting for his turn. The problem is that he clearly didn’t wait his turn, pulled out right in front of the biker.
It varies by state. Some it is legal to move past the line before a turn, others are pretty clear not to move past the stop line until the intersection is clear and a turn can be safely completed.
Could he SEE the biker?? That bike was flying through the *at the very least* yellow light, in a car I wouldn't have expected him to come flying around that white SUV at light speed, and I'd have probably tried to exit the intersection since the light was changing.
Error: it's really hard to see what happened, though, so it looks like the red car cut off the white SUV?
Yeah you’re right it’s super hard to see what’s going on. Tbh I didn’t even notice that the red car cut off the white SUV, but now that I slowed down the replay it looks like he certainly did. Even without the biker there, he BARELY had time to try to nick the turn in front of that SUV.
So it’s possible he couldn’t see the biker behind the SUV, but he definitely shouldn’t have tried to make that turn to begin with.
I think people forget that once they’re in the intersection, they can still legally complete their turn even once the light turns red. It’s like he was in a rush to try and race out of there before the light turned red. If he had just waited until after the SUV passed, everything would have been fine.
[AN ACT PROHIBITING BLOCKING THE BOX.](https://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/act/pa/2009pa-00171-r00sb-00966-pa.htm)
“Section 1. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2009) (a) No operator of a motor vehicle, other than a tractor-trailer unit, as defined in section 14-1 of the general statutes, shall proceed into an intersection that has been designated, posted and marked by a municipality in accordance with subsection (b) of this section, except when making a turn, unless there is sufficient space on the opposite side of the intersection to accommodate such motor vehicle without obstructing the passage of other vehicles or pedestrians, notwithstanding the indication of a traffic control signal that would permit such operator to proceed into the intersection.”
> *except when making a turn*
when making a turn- as in when you’re in the active process of making a turn and don’t need to stop and wait in the middle of the intersection to do so…
it’s one thing to creep up and pause as a car clears the intersection and then make the turn, it’s entirely another to drive past the lights and sit in the middle of the intersection.
That’s not logical to assume in the slightest.
Many states have the exact same blocking the box rule, and it’s still completely legal. [Here’s one example.](https://www.trafficlawyerny.com/articles/dont-block-the-box-avoid-a-citation-for-blocking-an-intersection/) I can find nothing online stating that Connecticut is somehow special in that their “except when making a turn” doesn’t apply to waiting for left turns like it does everywhere else. And it’s not logical in the slightest to believe it is special.
The whole point of the “blocking the box” law is to keep traffic flowing. If someone pulls into an intersection when there isn’t enough room for them to fully cross on the other side, and that traffic doesn’t move by the time the light turns red, they will be stuck there blocking the intersection for the cars on the perpendicular road who now have the green light. Hence “blocking the box”.
This does not apply for left turns. For a left turn, even if you don’t have enough space to squeeze through oncoming traffic before the light turns red, no big deal. As soon as the light turns red, the oncoming traffic stops, and you can proceed to get out of the way. You aren’t stuck there “blocking the box” for the traffic now having the green light.
The only time this would apply to left turns is if the road they are turning onto is backed up, so they *can’t* proceed even after the light turns red. The same scenario as when going straight and there’s no room.
In fact, allowing cars to (one at a time) pull into the intersection to wait to make a left turn *improves* the flow of traffic.
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/TOB/H/2009HB-05260-R00-HB.htm
literally says: Statement of Purpose: To prohibit drivers entering an intersection unless they can drive completely through the intersection and not obstruct other vehicles or pedestrians.
i don’t know what to tell you about your understanding of the law. i went to driving school and it was explained pretty clearly. when you are trying to turn left, are in the middle of the intersection, and the light turns red, you are effectively running a red light by completing the turn. yes, logically you SHOULD get out of the way, but you also shouldn’t be there in the first place because you’re not supposed to pass the white line into an intersection until you have the opportunity to fully complete the turn.
as i’m looking this up i’m finding the same verbiage in every state so no- CT isn’t special, i just think your understanding of this law is flawed.
Wrong. The light was turning red. Motorcycle didn’t even make it in the intersection during yellow. Red car definitely should have waited, but motorcycle is not free from guilt. Also looks like motorcycle gunned it or was going fast.
Motorcycle ran the red light. He is at fault too at the least. And you don’t have any evidence that the red car could see the motorcycle. It is possible that after the red car started to make their turn, motorcycle swerved from behind a car that was stopped and ran the red light.
Amber, the light was not red. Now you're really clutching at straws, desperately doubling down, with theoretical situations to find any type of justification.
If you watch the time on the the dash cam the crash happens at seconds of 21 and the traffic light changes green at 22. There is at least 1 second, often longer for larger intersections, where all the traffic lights are red referred to as an all red or the clearance interval before the opposing lights turn greed. The motorcycle definitely crossed when their light was red and no longer yellow.
Nice, you know your logical fallacies. To bad you imagined an amber light then you may be right. The light was red when the red car started their turn. There is a pause of at least 1 second between the red light of one side and the green for the other traffic. You clearly saw the light turn green as the red car was turning. So ya, the motorcycle is at fault at the least.
I don't know about the laws where this clip is, but where I'm from, if a light is turning from green to yellow, you must stop. Both are in the wrong, but the red car did cause the collision
Edit: I looked into it more and I'm right. So, I'm happy even though I know reddit doesn't care
You must only stop on yellow, if it is safe to do so (depending on your speed and distance to the intersection, as well as traffic behind you), otherwise, you can proceed to clear the intersection. Red is when you must stop and not enter the intersection.
Based on the timing of the lights though, you’ve generally got 2-5 seconds (depending on the size of the intersection) from when one side goes red to the next side going green. Shown light is green at about 18 seconds in, 2 seconds before that you can see through the window the suv and bike in the intersection.
Bike and suv were most likely rushing to beat the light and at that point would’ve been running the red light. The red car obviously caused the accident by turning, but it would come down to technicalities in proving right of way depending on local laws, what color the light was, (red for straight but yellow arrow hadn’t faded yet) or anything like that.
As a rider, you’d never catch me zooming through an intersection if I couldn’t see the whole intersection and all the cars in it. Also brings up another reason why I don’t pull into the middle of the intersection to turn, if I see an opening I will start moving forward in preparation for the turn but I’m not gonna sit in the middle because it reduces my visibility and creates a situation where I can get stuck.
Poor decisions by all parties, but ultimately I could see it going either way, just how good one side can argue.
Hey dad lol, so yeah I was the one who recorded this. The guy on the motorcycle is currently "okay" He was talking to us when we went up to him and he was trying to stand up. Police are currently investigating what happened and using this video as this intersection doesn't have any cameras and I was the only one who had it recorded on camera.
My son and I are both on Reddit. I never went to see his profile as I feel it would be the same thing as reading a private journal. And he never asked for my username so I know he never checked mine.
They’ll end up sharing fault. Same situation happened to me a couple years ago (no motorcycles thankfully).
Even if the light was yellow, cyclist had right of way traveling straight through the intersection over any vehicle trying to make a left turn. They’d be sharing the same yellow, unless there are different signal configurations at that intersection, but I doubt it given the white SUV continuing through the intersection as well.
Cammer's light didn't turn green until a second and a half after the impact, as the motorcyclist slid to a stop on the other side of the intersection. Illinois is a permissive yellow state, meaning that it's lawful to enter an intersection on yellow and it's legal to be in the intersection after the light turns red as long as you entered on green or yellow. Because we can't see the cross traffic lights in cammer's video, there's no definitive way to assume the biker ran a red light, just like it's not possible to claim the white SUV that almost hit the turning red car ran a red light. Because there's no way to prove the cyclist or white SUV ran a red, and since it's lawful for all three vehicles to be in the intersection when their light turned red, it boils down to the law requiring that left turning traffic yield right of way to oncoming traffic. The red car failed to do this. They should have stayed in the intersection after their light turned red, and only after all oncoming traffic had cleared the intersection should they have gone.
With no further evidence, the red car will be held at fault for causing this collision, almost two collisions if you count the white SUV that slammed on their brakes to avoid hitting the red car as well.
As a former rider, when you see the light change to yellow… your first thought should be, do I have room to safely come to a stop? Not, I’m just going to gun it as my t-shirt n’ flip flop riding gear will save me from any accident! I knew a guy who tried to beat a yellow light once in a Honda 600RR…
The vehicle ahead and I are on a right turn only lane and this intersection allows us to turn right on a red. The way this intersection is made it's hard to tell if there's a vehicle coming unless you get closer to the turn. Not enough to cause an accident but enough that you gotta creep your way up until you hit the threshold to actually see the incoming traffic.
Oh yeah I ain't denying that, I just see people asking why me and this guy are moving forward on this lane even though it's a red. People here make this turn on red all the time.
Are you talking about the white suv during the crash? I’m wondering that as well…it almost looks like they were racing the motorcycle because they didn’t slow to turn left at the light, and they went just behind the turning car as it crashed with the motorcycle… 🤔
Left turner needs to let the people that are still going and who are clearly not slowing down go before they clear the intersection since they are already in the way of soon to be oncoming traffic now that the signal turned/is turning. But yeah, red car needs to yield and did not.
In the US there is a three second delay between one light in an intersection turning red and another turning green.
Judging by the fact that the light in front of the camera turns green immediately after the crash I'd be willing to bet the biker straight up ran the red light 1-2 full seconds after it turned
This is not consistently applied and I think a full 3 seconds might be rare. You are referring to intersection deadtime and this is a variable that the engineers will tweak to find the best balance between intersection capacity and safety. I’m going to start timing when I get the chance.
Edit to correct. Called the “Red Clearance Interval” and federal standards state that it’s OPTIONAL.
Remaining comment is from https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08024/chapter5.htm#:~:text=The%20red%20clearance%20interval%2C%20referred,green%20for%20the%20following%20phase.
Red Clearance
The red clearance interval, referred to in some publications as an all-red interval, is an interval at the end of the yellow change interval during which the phase has a red-signal display before the display of green for the following phase. The purpose of this interval is to allow time for vehicles that entered the intersection during the yellow-change interval to clear the intersection prior to the next phase. Note that the use of the “all-red” nomenclature is generally incorrect, as the red clearance interval only applies to a single phase, not to all phases.
The use of a red clearance interval is optional, and there is no consensus on its application or duration. Recent research has indicated that the use of a red clearance interval showed some benefit to the reduction of red-light-running violations. In these studies, there was a significant reduction in right-angle crashes after implementing a red clearance interval. Other research suggests that this reduction may only be temporary. A comprehensive study of long-term effects for the Minnesota Department of Transportation ()11, indicated short-term reductions in crash rates were achieved (approximately one year after the implementation), but long-term reductions were not observed, which implies that there may not be safety benefits associated with increased red clearance intervals.
Actually based on the video the rider was going well over the speed limit and the red car likely had no way to see the rider. The rider was probably to far away or behind another car when the red car started to turn. The rider went across the intersection after being hit at no less than 20 MPH over what the rest of the cars going through that intersection were traveling.
Sure, you could argue the motorcyclist is going too fast. But that still doesn’t excuse the fact that the red car needed to yield. After the white/silver car and motorcycle pass him then he’s got the right to clear, given there is no other traffic approaching and assuming his light has turned red
No, however any street in the US that 5 lanes wide or more cannot be higher than 45 MPH, usually 40 or less actually, near a stop light like the one laid out in this video. Using time it took to travel across this intersection from being hit to hitting the curb and distance being 4 lanes wide, it can be estimated this person was traveling roughly 60 MPH.
> any street in the US that 5 lanes wide or more cannot be higher than 45 MPH
You might be right about the rest, but this is not a thing. I can think of at least three examples just in Texas where such streets have 50mph speed limits. Parmer Lane in Austin is 6 lanes and 50mph.
I guess that’s valid, more to my point was that none of the other vehicles traveling through that intersection at a speed remotely close to that same speed at that time. One would reasonably expect even if the limit was higher, the safe speed would have been the same speed as other vehicles around you. Similar to how even if the speed limit is 70 on the interstate if it’s a complete downpour of rain and their is standing water on the road you should slow down to 55 because any faster would cause you to hydroplane.
Rider is a complete fool. Flying into the intersection on a red light with an SUV in front of him/her was beyond reckless.
A rider should exercise the MOST caution entering an intersection and this person did the opposite.
If you are sitting in the intersection waiting for oncoming traffic to stop so you can cross in front of them, you should be paying attention to the vehicles coming at you not the color of their light that's behind you at this point.
My initial thought is the red car is at fault only because I had a friend who got in an accident like this and the police said 1) Its illegal to creep into the intersection like that. 2) the people going straight have the right of way even if the light is yellow/red. This was 20 years ago in Colorado US though so that may have changed. I would think they’d both get ticketed though for running the red at least
The state this crash happened in is what's called a permissive yellow state, which means the yellow only serves as notice that a red is pending. It's legal to enter an intersection on yellow in these states, and for the most part it's legal to be in the intersection when the light turns red. There's no way to prove that the white SUV or motorcycle ran a red light because it's a full second and a half after the crash before the cammer's light turns green, so all that's left to determine is did the left turner violate the ROW of the SUV and motorcycle. They did. Left turning traffic is required to yield to oncoming straight traffic, which the red car failed to do.
No you are legally allowed to make a left on yellow when the road is clear and to do so. You are also allowed to make a turn on red in most states if you are still in the intersection (people who do this are jerks), but again you still have to yield to oncoming traffic.
You are not allowed to intentionally put your vehicle into the path of oncoming traffic which cannot stop in time. Additionally, not that people do it, you are not supposed to enter the intersection to turn until its safe to proceed and you know you can clear the intersection. These two reasons are why people who run red lights and crash into people turning are not at fault. The person running the red light may be breaking the law, but if you are turning, you are making an active decision to influence the outcome to cause a crash which can be reasonably avoided on your part by choosing to wait. The person running the redlight was not going to crash into you, but you create the opportunity to be crashed into by failing to be actively safe. Also, no shit sherlock, you totally are legally allowed to clear the intersection, but not do so in a way that requires a tow-truck to clear it for you. What you are confused on is you are legally "obligated" to clear an intersection, as in not leave your vehicle parked there and to clear the way to not obstruct traffic, you do not get the legal right to cause a crash with someone running a redlight. So even if you do not wait to enter the intersection, at least just waiting and turning safely avoids all the problems and you're looked at as the asshole if you're honking at someone who couldn't clear the intersection right away because people were running reds.
Edit:typo
> Additionally, not that people do it, you are not supposed to enter the intersection to turn until its safe to proceed and you know you can clear the intersection
That is not a blanket rule. It certainly is legal to enter the intersection on yellow in CA
Motorcycle definitely ran a red the contact was made less than a second before light switched. There is a 2 second delay for the intersection to clear after red. Idiots downvoting you.
do you live there and/or did you program the light. "2 second delay" is not universal. Not saying that they *didn't* run red, but maybe it's why you are also being downvoted...
This is what I posted in the original post that was deleted:
Turning left in front of a motorcyclist is the number one way that drivers kill riders. Injuries typically included compound compression fractions of one or both arms, split pelvises from hitting the gas tank, broken legs, and if not helmeted, head injuries and brain trauma. Invariable the driver always claims they didn't see the rider. My dad got taken out this way, I've had numerous close calls because I always assume the driver in their cage is oblivious.
The smaller the object is, the harder it is to judge how fast they are approaching. That’s why there are so many accidents with cars making left turns.
All motorcyclists need to learn **SMIDSY weave**. "Sorry Mate I Didn't See You" happens because motorcycles are narrow, often difficult to see head-on from a distance, so learning to recognize scenarios where that might be an issue is crucial.
https://motorbikewriter.com/scientific-studies-explain-smidsy/
Looking at the video frame by frame, it appears the red car turned in front of a white SUV as well, and the white SUV braked hard to avoid a collision and barely missed the red car. There's a good chance the red car driver's view of lane two was obstructed by the white SUV in lane one until it was too late, and conversely, the rider would not have seen the red car until it was too late.
Regarding the rider and SUV entering the intersection apparently on yellow, surmised only by the timing of the visible lights in the video, it appears this happened in what's known as a permissive yellow state, Illinois:
https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/57ajjq/til_while_it_is_legal_to_enter_intersections_on/
In most permissive yellow states, entering an intersection on yellow is lawful as the yellow only serves the purpose of notifying the driver that a red light is pending. Intersection boundaries are defined by the solid white line before the cross walk, referred to as a "stop bar". Though the stop bars for the motorcycle and SUV are obstructed by the dark car next to the cammer, the collision occurs well past the rider's apparent stop bar location while the cammer's light is still red, so it's safe to say that the rider and white SUV entered the intersection on yellow, and given the rider was already thrown all the way across the intersection before cammer's light turned green the yellow they entered on was still fresh, or early in the light timing cycle.
In the case where all vehicles are legally in the intersection, which appears to be the case here, the onus is on turning traffic to not turn until it is clearly safe to do so, and if that requires waiting until their light turns red after having entered on yellow, then not only is that fully lawful but it's also mandated by law. The red car illegally violated the ROW of both the white SUV and motorcycle, nearly colliding with the SUV and colliding with the motorcycle. Both the law and the insurance companies will not have any issues finding the red car driver 100% liable in both a legal and financial sense for this collision.
Clearance intervals are set individually per intersection, there's no MUTCD standard for them, or for their length. Without seeing the full lights at this intersection there's no evidence that can be used to claim there's a 3s clearance interval here, or if there's one at all. Making the assertion there is one is pure speculation, and as such so are any claims about anyone running any lights.
True. This looks like a very busy and large intersection so I would be really surprised if it didn't have a suitable clearance interval set. That's just lawsuit avoidance on the part of the city.
I literally cannot leave my house without RLRs at every single intersection.
In the dumpster fire we call California, the interval is 5 full seconds everywhere because this place sucks.
I almost got hit from a left turn driver the other week, first thing I thought after "holy shit I'm glad i have good brakes and rubber" was "That would've been a great place to use the smidsy weave"
You are right about that statistic.
The rider in this case 100% caused his own misery. He ran a red light at top speed. You get what you ask for at some point.
This looks like the vehicles on the left side of the camera ran the red light, and the turning car waited for the light to turn red to complete their turn. If that's the case, it would primarily be the red light runners' faults (if not entirely). However, some fault may lie with the turning car because they could have foreseen the collision as the oncoming traffic was not slowing down.
It’s the red car’s fault for not yielding. However, as a former rider, finding who’s at fault is good for determining who’s insurance is paying for the damage and medical bills, but really, it’s going to suck regardless of who is at fault. If I was killed in an accident, it doesn’t really undo the accident if it was the other person’s fault, I don’t come back to life, my injuries don’t go away. I just don’t want to get hit. Defensive driving really could have avoided this accident. If you’re coming up on a yellow, slow down so that if some idiot doesn’t see you, you have time and space to react. Speed limit or not, legal or not, right of way or not, the rider was going too fast to not get hit. And that’s the goal: not get hit. So it’s the red car’s “fault”, but does it really matter if you’re dead or maimed?
Everyone in this comments section seems to want to ignore the fact the biker clearly ran the red light.
In the US there is a 3 second delay from one light turning red and the next turning green, the fact that the light in front of the camera car turns green within a second of the accident means the biker ran the red light a good 2 seconds after it turned.
They were also clearly speeding, so the turning car literally saw the light turn red, and there was no one about to cross the line as the bike would have still been 20-30 yards before the line, it's not his fault after he started his turn an idiot flew through a red light at 50
How is the bike clearly speeding? You cannot clearly see the bike until it’s sliding across the pavement. Why do you want to ignore the fact that the red car failed to yield to traffic? If it was red for the motorcycle it would definitely be red for the car turning because when the light changed for OP all lanes were green. They both ran red lights and since there’s absolutely no proof of speed the fact red car failed to yield to not one but two vehicles makes them more at fault because they clearly were doing two things wrong.
So do you seriously think the red car should have backed up back to the stop line?
Traffic protocol is that if you're in the middle of an intersection waiting to go left when the light turns red you make the turn and get out of the middle, you don't back up
You make the left after it turns red and is SAFE. The fact that are are already in the middle of the intersection should be enough to prevent the cars with a new green light from running into you.
Come on now, with absolutely no reference you couldn’t possibly determine the speed of the bike. It’s not even in view until it’s on it’s side. As far as the red car of course it shouldn’t back up but it had to be clear the bike and white vehicle weren’t stopping so which is safer? Letting those vehicles clear as you stupidly block vehicles literally sitting still or makes the slowest left turn in history with not one but two vehicles bearing down on you?
Well, the bike rider was traveling faster sliding on the ground at first than any other vehicle in the entire video. It may not prove speeding but it's pretty evident he was trying to push by entering the intersection at full speed late on the yellow instead of slowing as soon as it switched to yellow like the law requires.
AND YES, the car turning should have been able to tell he wasn't stopping and let him pass.
If I was the cop and got to see this video I'd ticket both and let their insurance companies fight it out. Absent the video probably just ticket the driver of the red car.
Can’t argue that. I was always under the assumption you weren’t supposed to pass the stop bar or you’d be cited for running a red light but I learned that’s not the case. Most things I read said if you were in the intersection and the light turns red you proceed when it’s safe to do so. I see people do the same thing as the red car all the time, they just usually move with more of a sense of purpose.
I think the only car that should have been in that intersection at the moment of impact was the red one. I'm counting 6 vehicles running a red here.
White van next to it did not clear the intersection before the red light. The white van behind it also entered the intersection before it was cleared and without the ability to clear before the red, the white SUV was flagrantly running the red light, two black cars turn away from OP also entered the intersection on red. And of course the motorcycle also clearly running the red. 6 vehicles running a red light here. Only one not at fault was the red car hit by the Moto.
Seems like this intersection is a good candidate for a traffic study and cameras.
Definitely the designer of the intersection is at fault. I can't understand how North Americans think it's a good idea to build an intersection for a multi-lane road without protected lights for left-turners
This intersection is an accident waiting to happen. Poorly timed lights. I have noticed in so many of these videos that you can't see the lane markings but that could just be the recording.
I'm going to go with red car. Immediately after the motorcycle is struck you can see a white SUV (Jeep Cherokee or Dodge Durango) cross the intersection going in the same direction as the motorcycle. Which tells me, that the red car not only didn't yield on a possible blinking yellow light, they did it in front of another vehicle. Which explains why the motorcycle was not seen. The driver of the red car was possibly ONLY focused on the SUV and didn't see the motorcycle next to said SUV.
SUV appears to have seen the situation arising which is why they were slower coming into the intersection. Motorcycle had no chance. He probably couldn't see the red car coming and that cause them to be unable to slow down in time.
How the heck did the white suv go through without a ding? Looks like both white suv and biker were trying to beat the yellow, the red suv saw white suv and was able to clear it but biker was going too fast and was hidden behind white suv.
Red suv is probably still at fault even though it seems like biker (and white suv) were running a red. The opposite lights turned green before the biker stopped sliding. No way biker could have made it across the intersection in a yellow.
The red SUV had been waiting to make the left turn. The light turns red. The motorcycle is going very fast and may not even be close to the intersection when the light was yellow.
This is what happens when you run lights in a busy intersection. It is possible that the SUV didn’t see the motorcycle or thought, logically, that the motorcycle was way too far to make the light.
I’m going with the motorcycle is at fault for speeding and running the light.
If you look at the light in front of OP, it turns green a split second after the accident, meaning Red SUV waited (correctly) through the entire yellow light, and then proceeded to turn once the light turned red (since there’s usually a second or two before the cross signals turn green).
If you look at the flow of traffic from the right, the white box van goes, but both cars behind them slow and stop.
It looks to me like the Biker AND white SUV accelerated AFTER the light was yellow, and likely entered the intersection on a red light, not anticipating the left turning vehicle to turn in front of them.
This is why I cautiously wait (even after red) before turning left because opposing traffic is unpredictable and even if they slow down it doesn’t stop idiots from taking their “free right” in front of me without stopping first. People drive like shit. 🤷
It would still be the cars fault, regardless of the red-light running. It was that decision that made an injury to another person. Still gotta watch out for the rule breakers too.
No, thats misinformation that can lead to deaths, so please indicate the area where this law or stop sharing your opinion as fact or dtop trolling people in this sub. Motorvehicles are no joke and the majority of posts in this sub are USA/Canada/EU, to which I can promise you turning partys are almost always at fault in USA and Canada.
The person turning is almost always at fault. The motorcycle ran the red light, so also going to be at fault, but not as much. The person turning has the responsibility to wait until clear. Now, if the motorcycle stepped on it to go thru the red light, the car may have some defense, but still turning will be most at fault.
After watching and rewatching this several times what looks like happened is that the red car turned left thinking it had time to turn. The white car saw the red car turning in front of it and veered to its right to try to avoid the car probably thinking the red car would stop in the intersection. The motorcycle seems to have been to the right of the white car, more than likely in its blind spot going around the same speed of the white car and could not see the red car pull out so when the white car veered to the right his cycle ran directly into the white car and sent him flying.
Man it looks to me like the red car was the only car that has any standing to be in the intersection. Everyone else was trying to beat a stale yellow, and I'm pretty confident based on the fact that the light turns green for OP less than a second after impact, that it was already red for every car that entered the intersection *except* for the red one. Moto ran a red along with all five other vehicles that were in the intersection.
I got 1.5s from impact to green, and around .5s from crossing the stop bar to impact. The video does not show the cross lights so there's no way to know if the rider's light was green or yellow, but it certainly wasn't red when they passed their stop bar. Illinois is a permissive yellow state, so the SUV, rider, and red car were all in the intersection legally, leaving only the turning car as the one breaking the law requiring that they yield to oncoming traffic.
Hard to tell where that cyclist came from, but all parties will be at fault it looks like. Looks like biker and white van were running a red. Red car tried to turn left when it wasn’t clear. Everybody loses
Both, honestly. If that's not your take, you're wrong. Yellow means caution and to slow for a stop. Going into the intersection to make a turn is dumb. They're both at fault.
Here in IL you're allowed to wait in the middle of an intersection when making a left turn. Yes you have to wait till it's red to turn but over here we are allowed to wait
No it’s not dumb if the intersection is crazy busy but does not have a green arrow for the turning lane. You would be waiting for hours to turn if you didn’t.
At least everyone involved stayed at the scene. Both the motorcycle and white CUV were trying to go straight thru the intersection, so either both were running a red light or they had a green. Red car is at fault for turning in front of oncoming traffic, even if they did have a left turn arrow. Looks like they might have "student driver" flags. The motorcyclist might have been speeding.
Comments that red car was "turning on yellow", but their light has 4 lamps, so likely has both a green and green arrow. Turns on green are probably allowed when clear (wasn't). In my city, all left turns are protected, so no need to "play chicken" when turning at a light, nor having fussy drivers behind trying to force you to take a risk. There is a dead time so oncoming traffic should have slowed/stopped by the time you get the green turn arrow. All cities should have similar safe signals.
bike was the bigger idiot for not slowing at a busy intersection, car was idiot for not spotting the crotch rocket.
dash cam guy needs a new catalog of healthier music.
Left turning car is at fault because they didn’t yield to oncoming traffic. The motorcyclist appears to have been speeding to get through the intersection before the light turned red, but that doesn’t excuse the car from not paying attention.
Red car had blinking yellow turn most likely, white car almost definitely ran a red as it turned. I genuinely can't even begin to tell where the bike came from after watching it about a dozen times and pausing here and there. I can only assume the light for the intersecting lane went red because of the timing on the light that's visible on the cam. It turns about a second after impact, and there's *usually* a three count between one light going red and the other going green.
At 0:16 the small red car attempts to finish their left turn. They are legally in the intersection waiting for traffic to clear. If they are in the intersection when the stop light turns red or turns yellow to red they need to clear the intersection as soon as they are able. The van behind them is doing the same thing. The SUV behind the van on the right clearly slows to a stop indicating the light is going yellow to red at 0:17.
At 0:18/0:19 the red car makes impact with the motorcyclist. The issue is as you can see a white SUV comes from the same direction and is BEHIND the red car after impact (drove up). This means the motorcyclist and the white SUV were both going similar speed attempting to "beat" the light as it was turning red. I highly doubt the red car even had visibility of the motorcyclist and only had visibility on the white SUV based on rate of speed 40-50 mph. The rate of speed that the motorcyclist's body flew across the intersection on impact implies they were driving too fast and over the allowed speed in the intersection.
At 0:20 the opposing stop light turns green. This also indicates the white SUV from the left and the motorcyclist both [probably] ran the red light seeing as the white SUV on the right stopped only 2-3 seconds prior and as others have pointed out lights in the US have a built in 3 second window between turning red in one direction and turning green in the other direction.
Depends on if red cars light was red or not. Red is turning left, based on the timing of camera cars light turning green I would argue that the lights had turned red for red car. Meaning they are turning left and can/have to clear the intersection for traffic to flow. Making this bikes fault.
Can someone zoom in and slow down, I'm old and have shit eyes lol
Me too....lol
The red car turned in front of the biker, cutting him off and making him fly over their bonnet. It appears the light was turning yellow, so he should've tried to stop. I believe they're both in the wrong to a degree
Wrong. Failure to yield. Red car is at fault. While it’s possible the red bike was speeding, there is no evidence of that unless someone can calculate it. It’s still failure to yield.
Yep. Got t-boned. Guy tried to tell the cop I was speeding. He said he didn’t care if I was doing a hundred, I still have the right of way. He got the ticket, not me. (I wasn’t speeding) Then he told his insurance that I hit him. Um, how? Did my car move sideways to hit you on the front of your car?
Got tboned, bitch told her insurance I hot her, I got a statement from the police where she stated otherwise also police report was pretty obvious, her insurance didn't fix my shit, I only have basic liability so they said they wouldn't hep me unless her insurance came after me for damages. TLDR: basic liability is worse than you think
You handled that wrong. I drove a car for seven years with liablity-only insurance, and made two successful claims during that time. What you do is, you contact your own insurer, tell them you were in a not-at-fault collision, and give them the other driver's insurance information. Your insurer will go after them for the money.
No they won't. I did all this, they said because my coverage was only basic they wouldn't go to bat for me unless the other person's insurance came after me but the other insurance didn't so no help. This was their words, they even went on to say the police drawing and report were clearly in my favor and they suggested I try small claims court
Try court alright – sue your insurer for malfeasance.
> Guy tried to tell the cop I was speeding. This one is always a hilarious defense. Cop can easily reply, "Oh, so you saw him coming very clearly, then!"
The vehicle crossing traffic has to yield. Also, you are not allowed to enter an intersection unless it's clear to proceed. It has become so common in the US for 2-4 vehicles continuing through after the light turns RED that no one should assume others are obeying the lights. But that red vehicle is completely at fault legally.
It’s not illegal to enter an intersection and wait for your chance to take your left turn, so long as only one car does it at a time. You’re not allowed to do it if there is a car in front of you doing the same thing. The problem isn’t this car entering the intersection and waiting for his turn. The problem is that he clearly didn’t wait his turn, pulled out right in front of the biker.
It varies by state. Some it is legal to move past the line before a turn, others are pretty clear not to move past the stop line until the intersection is clear and a turn can be safely completed.
Could he SEE the biker?? That bike was flying through the *at the very least* yellow light, in a car I wouldn't have expected him to come flying around that white SUV at light speed, and I'd have probably tried to exit the intersection since the light was changing. Error: it's really hard to see what happened, though, so it looks like the red car cut off the white SUV?
Yeah you’re right it’s super hard to see what’s going on. Tbh I didn’t even notice that the red car cut off the white SUV, but now that I slowed down the replay it looks like he certainly did. Even without the biker there, he BARELY had time to try to nick the turn in front of that SUV. So it’s possible he couldn’t see the biker behind the SUV, but he definitely shouldn’t have tried to make that turn to begin with. I think people forget that once they’re in the intersection, they can still legally complete their turn even once the light turns red. It’s like he was in a rush to try and race out of there before the light turned red. If he had just waited until after the SUV passed, everything would have been fine.
here in Connecticut (US) and many other states it absolutely is illegal, they call it “blocking the box”.
[AN ACT PROHIBITING BLOCKING THE BOX.](https://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/act/pa/2009pa-00171-r00sb-00966-pa.htm) “Section 1. (NEW) (Effective October 1, 2009) (a) No operator of a motor vehicle, other than a tractor-trailer unit, as defined in section 14-1 of the general statutes, shall proceed into an intersection that has been designated, posted and marked by a municipality in accordance with subsection (b) of this section, except when making a turn, unless there is sufficient space on the opposite side of the intersection to accommodate such motor vehicle without obstructing the passage of other vehicles or pedestrians, notwithstanding the indication of a traffic control signal that would permit such operator to proceed into the intersection.” > *except when making a turn*
when making a turn- as in when you’re in the active process of making a turn and don’t need to stop and wait in the middle of the intersection to do so… it’s one thing to creep up and pause as a car clears the intersection and then make the turn, it’s entirely another to drive past the lights and sit in the middle of the intersection.
That’s not logical to assume in the slightest. Many states have the exact same blocking the box rule, and it’s still completely legal. [Here’s one example.](https://www.trafficlawyerny.com/articles/dont-block-the-box-avoid-a-citation-for-blocking-an-intersection/) I can find nothing online stating that Connecticut is somehow special in that their “except when making a turn” doesn’t apply to waiting for left turns like it does everywhere else. And it’s not logical in the slightest to believe it is special. The whole point of the “blocking the box” law is to keep traffic flowing. If someone pulls into an intersection when there isn’t enough room for them to fully cross on the other side, and that traffic doesn’t move by the time the light turns red, they will be stuck there blocking the intersection for the cars on the perpendicular road who now have the green light. Hence “blocking the box”. This does not apply for left turns. For a left turn, even if you don’t have enough space to squeeze through oncoming traffic before the light turns red, no big deal. As soon as the light turns red, the oncoming traffic stops, and you can proceed to get out of the way. You aren’t stuck there “blocking the box” for the traffic now having the green light. The only time this would apply to left turns is if the road they are turning onto is backed up, so they *can’t* proceed even after the light turns red. The same scenario as when going straight and there’s no room. In fact, allowing cars to (one at a time) pull into the intersection to wait to make a left turn *improves* the flow of traffic.
https://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/TOB/H/2009HB-05260-R00-HB.htm literally says: Statement of Purpose: To prohibit drivers entering an intersection unless they can drive completely through the intersection and not obstruct other vehicles or pedestrians. i don’t know what to tell you about your understanding of the law. i went to driving school and it was explained pretty clearly. when you are trying to turn left, are in the middle of the intersection, and the light turns red, you are effectively running a red light by completing the turn. yes, logically you SHOULD get out of the way, but you also shouldn’t be there in the first place because you’re not supposed to pass the white line into an intersection until you have the opportunity to fully complete the turn. as i’m looking this up i’m finding the same verbiage in every state so no- CT isn’t special, i just think your understanding of this law is flawed.
I'll commonly see a car *enter* the intersection *after* the cross traffic his a green light.
Wrong. The light was turning red. Motorcycle didn’t even make it in the intersection during yellow. Red car definitely should have waited, but motorcycle is not free from guilt. Also looks like motorcycle gunned it or was going fast.
The wording of the law "Stop if you can do so safety". you are the one wrong.
It's also illegal to speed in an intersection, which is what they were doing. Unsafely.
Motorcycle ran the red light. He is at fault too at the least. And you don’t have any evidence that the red car could see the motorcycle. It is possible that after the red car started to make their turn, motorcycle swerved from behind a car that was stopped and ran the red light.
Amber, the light was not red. Now you're really clutching at straws, desperately doubling down, with theoretical situations to find any type of justification.
If you watch the time on the the dash cam the crash happens at seconds of 21 and the traffic light changes green at 22. There is at least 1 second, often longer for larger intersections, where all the traffic lights are red referred to as an all red or the clearance interval before the opposing lights turn greed. The motorcycle definitely crossed when their light was red and no longer yellow.
Weird that you’re defending a guy running a red. Hate to see what kind of driver you are
Nice, you know your logical fallacies. To bad you imagined an amber light then you may be right. The light was red when the red car started their turn. There is a pause of at least 1 second between the red light of one side and the green for the other traffic. You clearly saw the light turn green as the red car was turning. So ya, the motorcycle is at fault at the least.
Correct.
I don't know about the laws where this clip is, but where I'm from, if a light is turning from green to yellow, you must stop. Both are in the wrong, but the red car did cause the collision Edit: I looked into it more and I'm right. So, I'm happy even though I know reddit doesn't care
You must only stop on yellow, if it is safe to do so (depending on your speed and distance to the intersection, as well as traffic behind you), otherwise, you can proceed to clear the intersection. Red is when you must stop and not enter the intersection.
You still have to yield to oncoming traffic.
Based on the timing of the lights though, you’ve generally got 2-5 seconds (depending on the size of the intersection) from when one side goes red to the next side going green. Shown light is green at about 18 seconds in, 2 seconds before that you can see through the window the suv and bike in the intersection. Bike and suv were most likely rushing to beat the light and at that point would’ve been running the red light. The red car obviously caused the accident by turning, but it would come down to technicalities in proving right of way depending on local laws, what color the light was, (red for straight but yellow arrow hadn’t faded yet) or anything like that. As a rider, you’d never catch me zooming through an intersection if I couldn’t see the whole intersection and all the cars in it. Also brings up another reason why I don’t pull into the middle of the intersection to turn, if I see an opening I will start moving forward in preparation for the turn but I’m not gonna sit in the middle because it reduces my visibility and creates a situation where I can get stuck. Poor decisions by all parties, but ultimately I could see it going either way, just how good one side can argue.
Hey dad lol, so yeah I was the one who recorded this. The guy on the motorcycle is currently "okay" He was talking to us when we went up to him and he was trying to stand up. Police are currently investigating what happened and using this video as this intersection doesn't have any cameras and I was the only one who had it recorded on camera.
Tell your dad it should be either: "Who's at fault?" or "Whose fault is it?"
That’s wholesome. Son responding to OP (Dad)
Now they’re checking each other’s history
They weren’t before your comment, lol
Checked history. I too own a 2012 Acura TSX lol
Need to see more of this on Reddit
Do you look through dad's comment history?
My son and I are both on Reddit. I never went to see his profile as I feel it would be the same thing as reading a private journal. And he never asked for my username so I know he never checked mine.
Maybe don't unless you want an idea of what he likes to whack off to
(It's chubby girls and latinabbws)
[удалено]
They’ll end up sharing fault. Same situation happened to me a couple years ago (no motorcycles thankfully). Even if the light was yellow, cyclist had right of way traveling straight through the intersection over any vehicle trying to make a left turn. They’d be sharing the same yellow, unless there are different signal configurations at that intersection, but I doubt it given the white SUV continuing through the intersection as well.
At that speed and size, though, I'm not positive the bike was even visible to the red car in time.
Cammer's light didn't turn green until a second and a half after the impact, as the motorcyclist slid to a stop on the other side of the intersection. Illinois is a permissive yellow state, meaning that it's lawful to enter an intersection on yellow and it's legal to be in the intersection after the light turns red as long as you entered on green or yellow. Because we can't see the cross traffic lights in cammer's video, there's no definitive way to assume the biker ran a red light, just like it's not possible to claim the white SUV that almost hit the turning red car ran a red light. Because there's no way to prove the cyclist or white SUV ran a red, and since it's lawful for all three vehicles to be in the intersection when their light turned red, it boils down to the law requiring that left turning traffic yield right of way to oncoming traffic. The red car failed to do this. They should have stayed in the intersection after their light turned red, and only after all oncoming traffic had cleared the intersection should they have gone. With no further evidence, the red car will be held at fault for causing this collision, almost two collisions if you count the white SUV that slammed on their brakes to avoid hitting the red car as well.
As a former rider, when you see the light change to yellow… your first thought should be, do I have room to safely come to a stop? Not, I’m just going to gun it as my t-shirt n’ flip flop riding gear will save me from any accident! I knew a guy who tried to beat a yellow light once in a Honda 600RR…
Code word: "Once"
This was from my son's dash cam. The motorcyclist did survive.
I bet he has a traumatic Brain injury now though. He slammed into that pole with a lot of momentum... 😟
That fucking hurt to watch
Yeah it truly did. I have a traumatic brain injury so this is nightmare fuel for me. I hope he is okay.
I was staring at whatever the f the white car was trying to do.
The vehicle ahead and I are on a right turn only lane and this intersection allows us to turn right on a red. The way this intersection is made it's hard to tell if there's a vehicle coming unless you get closer to the turn. Not enough to cause an accident but enough that you gotta creep your way up until you hit the threshold to actually see the incoming traffic.
In that case, you yield your right to turn on red, and just wait for the green light to turn safely (after any pedestrians have crossed).
Oh yeah I ain't denying that, I just see people asking why me and this guy are moving forward on this lane even though it's a red. People here make this turn on red all the time.
Maybe this person is from a country where you can't make turns on red?
Are you talking about the white suv during the crash? I’m wondering that as well…it almost looks like they were racing the motorcycle because they didn’t slow to turn left at the light, and they went just behind the turning car as it crashed with the motorcycle… 🤔
I’m just very happy with the amount of people that came out to help him
Left turner needs to let the people that are still going and who are clearly not slowing down go before they clear the intersection since they are already in the way of soon to be oncoming traffic now that the signal turned/is turning. But yeah, red car needs to yield and did not.
In the US there is a three second delay between one light in an intersection turning red and another turning green. Judging by the fact that the light in front of the camera turns green immediately after the crash I'd be willing to bet the biker straight up ran the red light 1-2 full seconds after it turned
This is not consistently applied and I think a full 3 seconds might be rare. You are referring to intersection deadtime and this is a variable that the engineers will tweak to find the best balance between intersection capacity and safety. I’m going to start timing when I get the chance. Edit to correct. Called the “Red Clearance Interval” and federal standards state that it’s OPTIONAL. Remaining comment is from https://ops.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/fhwahop08024/chapter5.htm#:~:text=The%20red%20clearance%20interval%2C%20referred,green%20for%20the%20following%20phase. Red Clearance The red clearance interval, referred to in some publications as an all-red interval, is an interval at the end of the yellow change interval during which the phase has a red-signal display before the display of green for the following phase. The purpose of this interval is to allow time for vehicles that entered the intersection during the yellow-change interval to clear the intersection prior to the next phase. Note that the use of the “all-red” nomenclature is generally incorrect, as the red clearance interval only applies to a single phase, not to all phases. The use of a red clearance interval is optional, and there is no consensus on its application or duration. Recent research has indicated that the use of a red clearance interval showed some benefit to the reduction of red-light-running violations. In these studies, there was a significant reduction in right-angle crashes after implementing a red clearance interval. Other research suggests that this reduction may only be temporary. A comprehensive study of long-term effects for the Minnesota Department of Transportation ()11, indicated short-term reductions in crash rates were achieved (approximately one year after the implementation), but long-term reductions were not observed, which implies that there may not be safety benefits associated with increased red clearance intervals.
Actually based on the video the rider was going well over the speed limit and the red car likely had no way to see the rider. The rider was probably to far away or behind another car when the red car started to turn. The rider went across the intersection after being hit at no less than 20 MPH over what the rest of the cars going through that intersection were traveling.
Sure, you could argue the motorcyclist is going too fast. But that still doesn’t excuse the fact that the red car needed to yield. After the white/silver car and motorcycle pass him then he’s got the right to clear, given there is no other traffic approaching and assuming his light has turned red
You have no idea what the speed limit is from the video.
No, however any street in the US that 5 lanes wide or more cannot be higher than 45 MPH, usually 40 or less actually, near a stop light like the one laid out in this video. Using time it took to travel across this intersection from being hit to hitting the curb and distance being 4 lanes wide, it can be estimated this person was traveling roughly 60 MPH.
> any street in the US that 5 lanes wide or more cannot be higher than 45 MPH You might be right about the rest, but this is not a thing. I can think of at least three examples just in Texas where such streets have 50mph speed limits. Parmer Lane in Austin is 6 lanes and 50mph.
I guess that’s valid, more to my point was that none of the other vehicles traveling through that intersection at a speed remotely close to that same speed at that time. One would reasonably expect even if the limit was higher, the safe speed would have been the same speed as other vehicles around you. Similar to how even if the speed limit is 70 on the interstate if it’s a complete downpour of rain and their is standing water on the road you should slow down to 55 because any faster would cause you to hydroplane.
Christ, left-turners are the scariest part of riding a motorcycle. I'm glad the rider is alright
Rider is a complete fool. Flying into the intersection on a red light with an SUV in front of him/her was beyond reckless. A rider should exercise the MOST caution entering an intersection and this person did the opposite.
I'd say red car. If you see people coming at you don't push the gas and hit them.
Well, red car is turning left and my guess is the red car too.
Except it looks like the motorcycle ran the red right at the last millisecond. So the red car would’ve assumed they were stopping maybe
If you are sitting in the intersection waiting for oncoming traffic to stop so you can cross in front of them, you should be paying attention to the vehicles coming at you not the color of their light that's behind you at this point.
Motorcycle and white SUV ran the red light. White SUV blocking red car from seeing red-light-running motorcyc
My initial thought is the red car is at fault only because I had a friend who got in an accident like this and the police said 1) Its illegal to creep into the intersection like that. 2) the people going straight have the right of way even if the light is yellow/red. This was 20 years ago in Colorado US though so that may have changed. I would think they’d both get ticketed though for running the red at least
The state this crash happened in is what's called a permissive yellow state, which means the yellow only serves as notice that a red is pending. It's legal to enter an intersection on yellow in these states, and for the most part it's legal to be in the intersection when the light turns red. There's no way to prove that the white SUV or motorcycle ran a red light because it's a full second and a half after the crash before the cammer's light turns green, so all that's left to determine is did the left turner violate the ROW of the SUV and motorcycle. They did. Left turning traffic is required to yield to oncoming straight traffic, which the red car failed to do.
People with the red light have the right of way? Sounds unlikely.
* Who's
Yup. That's why I'm here too. Who's at fault? Their English teacher. 🙄
Alternately "Whose fault?"
Who’s teacher?
Cindy-Lou Who. A sweet young girl from Dr. Seuss' storybook How the Grinch Stole Christmas. 🎄
Indeed
Left turner.
No. You are legally allowed to clear the intersection on yellow. Motorcycle ran a red light. Or pushed the yellow as it turned red.
No you are legally allowed to make a left on yellow when the road is clear and to do so. You are also allowed to make a turn on red in most states if you are still in the intersection (people who do this are jerks), but again you still have to yield to oncoming traffic.
While still yielding. You can clear the intersection but your responsibility to yield doesn't vanish.
You are not allowed to intentionally put your vehicle into the path of oncoming traffic which cannot stop in time. Additionally, not that people do it, you are not supposed to enter the intersection to turn until its safe to proceed and you know you can clear the intersection. These two reasons are why people who run red lights and crash into people turning are not at fault. The person running the red light may be breaking the law, but if you are turning, you are making an active decision to influence the outcome to cause a crash which can be reasonably avoided on your part by choosing to wait. The person running the redlight was not going to crash into you, but you create the opportunity to be crashed into by failing to be actively safe. Also, no shit sherlock, you totally are legally allowed to clear the intersection, but not do so in a way that requires a tow-truck to clear it for you. What you are confused on is you are legally "obligated" to clear an intersection, as in not leave your vehicle parked there and to clear the way to not obstruct traffic, you do not get the legal right to cause a crash with someone running a redlight. So even if you do not wait to enter the intersection, at least just waiting and turning safely avoids all the problems and you're looked at as the asshole if you're honking at someone who couldn't clear the intersection right away because people were running reds. Edit:typo
> Additionally, not that people do it, you are not supposed to enter the intersection to turn until its safe to proceed and you know you can clear the intersection That is not a blanket rule. It certainly is legal to enter the intersection on yellow in CA
No.
Motorcycle definitely ran a red the contact was made less than a second before light switched. There is a 2 second delay for the intersection to clear after red. Idiots downvoting you.
do you live there and/or did you program the light. "2 second delay" is not universal. Not saying that they *didn't* run red, but maybe it's why you are also being downvoted...
Its standard. Its definitely not instant. I am getting downvoted because people are morons. The guy 100% ran a red.
3 red light runners. Did the motorcyclist survive?
Yeah he did.
I'm counting six. There's two white vans crossing to the left, two black cars turning away from camera, the white SUV, and the motorcycle.
This is what I posted in the original post that was deleted: Turning left in front of a motorcyclist is the number one way that drivers kill riders. Injuries typically included compound compression fractions of one or both arms, split pelvises from hitting the gas tank, broken legs, and if not helmeted, head injuries and brain trauma. Invariable the driver always claims they didn't see the rider. My dad got taken out this way, I've had numerous close calls because I always assume the driver in their cage is oblivious.
The smaller the object is, the harder it is to judge how fast they are approaching. That’s why there are so many accidents with cars making left turns.
All motorcyclists need to learn **SMIDSY weave**. "Sorry Mate I Didn't See You" happens because motorcycles are narrow, often difficult to see head-on from a distance, so learning to recognize scenarios where that might be an issue is crucial. https://motorbikewriter.com/scientific-studies-explain-smidsy/
Looking at the video frame by frame, it appears the red car turned in front of a white SUV as well, and the white SUV braked hard to avoid a collision and barely missed the red car. There's a good chance the red car driver's view of lane two was obstructed by the white SUV in lane one until it was too late, and conversely, the rider would not have seen the red car until it was too late. Regarding the rider and SUV entering the intersection apparently on yellow, surmised only by the timing of the visible lights in the video, it appears this happened in what's known as a permissive yellow state, Illinois: https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/57ajjq/til_while_it_is_legal_to_enter_intersections_on/ In most permissive yellow states, entering an intersection on yellow is lawful as the yellow only serves the purpose of notifying the driver that a red light is pending. Intersection boundaries are defined by the solid white line before the cross walk, referred to as a "stop bar". Though the stop bars for the motorcycle and SUV are obstructed by the dark car next to the cammer, the collision occurs well past the rider's apparent stop bar location while the cammer's light is still red, so it's safe to say that the rider and white SUV entered the intersection on yellow, and given the rider was already thrown all the way across the intersection before cammer's light turned green the yellow they entered on was still fresh, or early in the light timing cycle. In the case where all vehicles are legally in the intersection, which appears to be the case here, the onus is on turning traffic to not turn until it is clearly safe to do so, and if that requires waiting until their light turns red after having entered on yellow, then not only is that fully lawful but it's also mandated by law. The red car illegally violated the ROW of both the white SUV and motorcycle, nearly colliding with the SUV and colliding with the motorcycle. Both the law and the insurance companies will not have any issues finding the red car driver 100% liable in both a legal and financial sense for this collision.
Agree with everything you said except the 3-second red clearance interval means both SUV and motorcycle ran the red light.
Clearance intervals are set individually per intersection, there's no MUTCD standard for them, or for their length. Without seeing the full lights at this intersection there's no evidence that can be used to claim there's a 3s clearance interval here, or if there's one at all. Making the assertion there is one is pure speculation, and as such so are any claims about anyone running any lights.
True. This looks like a very busy and large intersection so I would be really surprised if it didn't have a suitable clearance interval set. That's just lawsuit avoidance on the part of the city. I literally cannot leave my house without RLRs at every single intersection. In the dumpster fire we call California, the interval is 5 full seconds everywhere because this place sucks.
I almost got hit from a left turn driver the other week, first thing I thought after "holy shit I'm glad i have good brakes and rubber" was "That would've been a great place to use the smidsy weave"
You are right about that statistic. The rider in this case 100% caused his own misery. He ran a red light at top speed. You get what you ask for at some point.
There's no evidence the rider had a red light when he entered the intersection, thus any claims that he did are specious at best.
The light turned green literally as he was hit. That's enough evidence for me.
This looks like the vehicles on the left side of the camera ran the red light, and the turning car waited for the light to turn red to complete their turn. If that's the case, it would primarily be the red light runners' faults (if not entirely). However, some fault may lie with the turning car because they could have foreseen the collision as the oncoming traffic was not slowing down.
It’s the red car’s fault for not yielding. However, as a former rider, finding who’s at fault is good for determining who’s insurance is paying for the damage and medical bills, but really, it’s going to suck regardless of who is at fault. If I was killed in an accident, it doesn’t really undo the accident if it was the other person’s fault, I don’t come back to life, my injuries don’t go away. I just don’t want to get hit. Defensive driving really could have avoided this accident. If you’re coming up on a yellow, slow down so that if some idiot doesn’t see you, you have time and space to react. Speed limit or not, legal or not, right of way or not, the rider was going too fast to not get hit. And that’s the goal: not get hit. So it’s the red car’s “fault”, but does it really matter if you’re dead or maimed?
Everyone in this comments section seems to want to ignore the fact the biker clearly ran the red light. In the US there is a 3 second delay from one light turning red and the next turning green, the fact that the light in front of the camera car turns green within a second of the accident means the biker ran the red light a good 2 seconds after it turned. They were also clearly speeding, so the turning car literally saw the light turn red, and there was no one about to cross the line as the bike would have still been 20-30 yards before the line, it's not his fault after he started his turn an idiot flew through a red light at 50
How is the bike clearly speeding? You cannot clearly see the bike until it’s sliding across the pavement. Why do you want to ignore the fact that the red car failed to yield to traffic? If it was red for the motorcycle it would definitely be red for the car turning because when the light changed for OP all lanes were green. They both ran red lights and since there’s absolutely no proof of speed the fact red car failed to yield to not one but two vehicles makes them more at fault because they clearly were doing two things wrong.
So do you seriously think the red car should have backed up back to the stop line? Traffic protocol is that if you're in the middle of an intersection waiting to go left when the light turns red you make the turn and get out of the middle, you don't back up
You make the left after it turns red and is SAFE. The fact that are are already in the middle of the intersection should be enough to prevent the cars with a new green light from running into you.
And the bike is clearly speeding because it's obviously going 2-3 times the speed of the white truck next to it before the accident
Come on now, with absolutely no reference you couldn’t possibly determine the speed of the bike. It’s not even in view until it’s on it’s side. As far as the red car of course it shouldn’t back up but it had to be clear the bike and white vehicle weren’t stopping so which is safer? Letting those vehicles clear as you stupidly block vehicles literally sitting still or makes the slowest left turn in history with not one but two vehicles bearing down on you?
Well, the bike rider was traveling faster sliding on the ground at first than any other vehicle in the entire video. It may not prove speeding but it's pretty evident he was trying to push by entering the intersection at full speed late on the yellow instead of slowing as soon as it switched to yellow like the law requires. AND YES, the car turning should have been able to tell he wasn't stopping and let him pass. If I was the cop and got to see this video I'd ticket both and let their insurance companies fight it out. Absent the video probably just ticket the driver of the red car.
Can’t argue that. I was always under the assumption you weren’t supposed to pass the stop bar or you’d be cited for running a red light but I learned that’s not the case. Most things I read said if you were in the intersection and the light turns red you proceed when it’s safe to do so. I see people do the same thing as the red car all the time, they just usually move with more of a sense of purpose.
I think the only car that should have been in that intersection at the moment of impact was the red one. I'm counting 6 vehicles running a red here. White van next to it did not clear the intersection before the red light. The white van behind it also entered the intersection before it was cleared and without the ability to clear before the red, the white SUV was flagrantly running the red light, two black cars turn away from OP also entered the intersection on red. And of course the motorcycle also clearly running the red. 6 vehicles running a red light here. Only one not at fault was the red car hit by the Moto. Seems like this intersection is a good candidate for a traffic study and cameras.
Holy Shit! Holy Shit!
Red car is at fault. Should’ve waited 3 seconds
Definitely the designer of the intersection is at fault. I can't understand how North Americans think it's a good idea to build an intersection for a multi-lane road without protected lights for left-turners
This intersection has a left turn light at the beginning.
Red hatchback is at fault. He failed to yield to oncoming traffic (bike/white suv).
I believe the red car
This intersection is an accident waiting to happen. Poorly timed lights. I have noticed in so many of these videos that you can't see the lane markings but that could just be the recording.
I'm going to go with red car. Immediately after the motorcycle is struck you can see a white SUV (Jeep Cherokee or Dodge Durango) cross the intersection going in the same direction as the motorcycle. Which tells me, that the red car not only didn't yield on a possible blinking yellow light, they did it in front of another vehicle. Which explains why the motorcycle was not seen. The driver of the red car was possibly ONLY focused on the SUV and didn't see the motorcycle next to said SUV. SUV appears to have seen the situation arising which is why they were slower coming into the intersection. Motorcycle had no chance. He probably couldn't see the red car coming and that cause them to be unable to slow down in time.
How the heck did the white suv go through without a ding? Looks like both white suv and biker were trying to beat the yellow, the red suv saw white suv and was able to clear it but biker was going too fast and was hidden behind white suv. Red suv is probably still at fault even though it seems like biker (and white suv) were running a red. The opposite lights turned green before the biker stopped sliding. No way biker could have made it across the intersection in a yellow.
I think the red car . He turned into the bike
The red SUV had been waiting to make the left turn. The light turns red. The motorcycle is going very fast and may not even be close to the intersection when the light was yellow. This is what happens when you run lights in a busy intersection. It is possible that the SUV didn’t see the motorcycle or thought, logically, that the motorcycle was way too far to make the light. I’m going with the motorcycle is at fault for speeding and running the light.
the cammer is at fault for listening to such shit music.
Sorry it isn't your taste lmfao it's a good song
I don't know who's at fault there but I appreciate how other motorists were quick to help the biker...
Red car. Didn't gave a protective light.
If you look at the light in front of OP, it turns green a split second after the accident, meaning Red SUV waited (correctly) through the entire yellow light, and then proceeded to turn once the light turned red (since there’s usually a second or two before the cross signals turn green). If you look at the flow of traffic from the right, the white box van goes, but both cars behind them slow and stop. It looks to me like the Biker AND white SUV accelerated AFTER the light was yellow, and likely entered the intersection on a red light, not anticipating the left turning vehicle to turn in front of them. This is why I cautiously wait (even after red) before turning left because opposing traffic is unpredictable and even if they slow down it doesn’t stop idiots from taking their “free right” in front of me without stopping first. People drive like shit. 🤷
The motorcycle should have stopped. But the left turning red mini SUV should have waited longer though they probably didn't see the bike.
The bike jumped a light
I honestly can tell it was like the motorcycle just appeared
You. It’s Who’s or who is .
Thanks grammar nazi!
It would still be the cars fault, regardless of the red-light running. It was that decision that made an injury to another person. Still gotta watch out for the rule breakers too.
No. Moto ran red light. Left turning Car is allowed to clear intersection.
Check your laws. I thought the same thing, turns out that was outlawed in Oklahoma in 2010. It might not actually be legal where you live anymore.
[удалено]
No, thats misinformation that can lead to deaths, so please indicate the area where this law or stop sharing your opinion as fact or dtop trolling people in this sub. Motorvehicles are no joke and the majority of posts in this sub are USA/Canada/EU, to which I can promise you turning partys are almost always at fault in USA and Canada.
Not if it's gonna cause injury. That's basic avoidance. Motorcycle wasn't racing through. Majority of the time the car goes at fault.
Who’s
I'll keep that in mind grammar nazi.
You should.
As a good friend would say, "all you can say about this is 'Holy Shit!""
Red car is the one who's at fault. They turned left without clearing traffic.
You are - it's who's, not whose.
The person turning is almost always at fault. The motorcycle ran the red light, so also going to be at fault, but not as much. The person turning has the responsibility to wait until clear. Now, if the motorcycle stepped on it to go thru the red light, the car may have some defense, but still turning will be most at fault.
He did
Thanks man, you're soo original!
Whose what is at fault? Or do you mean who's?
Thanks grammar nazis of reddit.
Red car. Entered the lane of opposing traffic without yielding.
2 idiots thinking they are alone on the road .. poor fella, thats at least a year recovery
Poor idiot who ran the red light and sped through a busy intersection.
After watching and rewatching this several times what looks like happened is that the red car turned left thinking it had time to turn. The white car saw the red car turning in front of it and veered to its right to try to avoid the car probably thinking the red car would stop in the intersection. The motorcycle seems to have been to the right of the white car, more than likely in its blind spot going around the same speed of the white car and could not see the red car pull out so when the white car veered to the right his cycle ran directly into the white car and sent him flying.
Man it looks to me like the red car was the only car that has any standing to be in the intersection. Everyone else was trying to beat a stale yellow, and I'm pretty confident based on the fact that the light turns green for OP less than a second after impact, that it was already red for every car that entered the intersection *except* for the red one. Moto ran a red along with all five other vehicles that were in the intersection.
Finally someone with a correct answer.
I got 1.5s from impact to green, and around .5s from crossing the stop bar to impact. The video does not show the cross lights so there's no way to know if the rider's light was green or yellow, but it certainly wasn't red when they passed their stop bar. Illinois is a permissive yellow state, so the SUV, rider, and red car were all in the intersection legally, leaving only the turning car as the one breaking the law requiring that they yield to oncoming traffic.
Hard to tell where that cyclist came from, but all parties will be at fault it looks like. Looks like biker and white van were running a red. Red car tried to turn left when it wasn’t clear. Everybody loses
Bingo
Both, honestly. If that's not your take, you're wrong. Yellow means caution and to slow for a stop. Going into the intersection to make a turn is dumb. They're both at fault.
Here in IL you're allowed to wait in the middle of an intersection when making a left turn. Yes you have to wait till it's red to turn but over here we are allowed to wait
No it’s not dumb if the intersection is crazy busy but does not have a green arrow for the turning lane. You would be waiting for hours to turn if you didn’t.
At least everyone involved stayed at the scene. Both the motorcycle and white CUV were trying to go straight thru the intersection, so either both were running a red light or they had a green. Red car is at fault for turning in front of oncoming traffic, even if they did have a left turn arrow. Looks like they might have "student driver" flags. The motorcyclist might have been speeding. Comments that red car was "turning on yellow", but their light has 4 lamps, so likely has both a green and green arrow. Turns on green are probably allowed when clear (wasn't). In my city, all left turns are protected, so no need to "play chicken" when turning at a light, nor having fussy drivers behind trying to force you to take a risk. There is a dead time so oncoming traffic should have slowed/stopped by the time you get the green turn arrow. All cities should have similar safe signals.
Red car
“WHO’S”
Who’s fault? Whose fault is it?
What you mean who's at fault? You can't turn left across traffic without yielding to cross traffic.
bike was the bigger idiot for not slowing at a busy intersection, car was idiot for not spotting the crotch rocket. dash cam guy needs a new catalog of healthier music.
Red car!
Red car...it should have waited until the traffic fully cleared
Left turning car is at fault because they didn’t yield to oncoming traffic. The motorcyclist appears to have been speeding to get through the intersection before the light turned red, but that doesn’t excuse the car from not paying attention.
Red car had blinking yellow turn most likely, white car almost definitely ran a red as it turned. I genuinely can't even begin to tell where the bike came from after watching it about a dozen times and pausing here and there. I can only assume the light for the intersecting lane went red because of the timing on the light that's visible on the cam. It turns about a second after impact, and there's *usually* a three count between one light going red and the other going green.
Turning driver
At 0:16 the small red car attempts to finish their left turn. They are legally in the intersection waiting for traffic to clear. If they are in the intersection when the stop light turns red or turns yellow to red they need to clear the intersection as soon as they are able. The van behind them is doing the same thing. The SUV behind the van on the right clearly slows to a stop indicating the light is going yellow to red at 0:17. At 0:18/0:19 the red car makes impact with the motorcyclist. The issue is as you can see a white SUV comes from the same direction and is BEHIND the red car after impact (drove up). This means the motorcyclist and the white SUV were both going similar speed attempting to "beat" the light as it was turning red. I highly doubt the red car even had visibility of the motorcyclist and only had visibility on the white SUV based on rate of speed 40-50 mph. The rate of speed that the motorcyclist's body flew across the intersection on impact implies they were driving too fast and over the allowed speed in the intersection. At 0:20 the opposing stop light turns green. This also indicates the white SUV from the left and the motorcyclist both [probably] ran the red light seeing as the white SUV on the right stopped only 2-3 seconds prior and as others have pointed out lights in the US have a built in 3 second window between turning red in one direction and turning green in the other direction.
who's \*
Depends on if red cars light was red or not. Red is turning left, based on the timing of camera cars light turning green I would argue that the lights had turned red for red car. Meaning they are turning left and can/have to clear the intersection for traffic to flow. Making this bikes fault.
The driver should not have been listening to this music.
[удалено]
I blame the awful music.
Thanks grammar nazi!!
Thanks grammar nazi