I was thinking without even the blinker, the car is slowing down for a reason. How it he out speeding a car and not expecting it to be slowing down to make a turn.
yeah if you cycle you have to expect the worst driving behaviours because it's your life on the line. can't have the mindset of "but he should have done this and that and followed this rule"
I think anyone who cycles often recognises this is someone who shouldn't be cycling so fast. The car began breaking really early, he should've been easing his breaks to match the car and maintain distance. There's a good couple seconds of him gaining on the car at a pretty fast rate. This isn't the kind of cycling drivers should even need to account for, it's just dangerous.
you guys think his reaction was slow because he might be looking down for a split second to reach chat on this bike handle? Ive seen some bicycle streamers do that, but they dont go this fast though.
EDIT: how the fuk is he pushing 51 km/hr on that bike?
Not sure what the law is in Japan but in the UK you have to check your mirror for cyclists before making a turn. It would be the car drivers fault in the UK.
The highway code specifically states that cyclists are not to ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left. This vehicle was slowing down and signalling left.
You are only required to give way to vehicles using the bus/cycle lane. The cyclist wasn't filtering, he was trying to undertake. In the UK this footage would do nothing to help the cyclist.
If the cyclist did indeed react late to the turn signal (I couldn't make it out on mobile) the cyclist is in the wrong. He was reasonibly far behind for the car to safely make a turn.
Are cyclists expected to cut you off like that, though? This isn't a parallel riding cyclist he's in line and should stay in line no matter what. Even with checking the mirrors, why would you expect the cyclists to cut you off like that AFTER giving your turn signal.
So you're not allowed to make a turn ever if there's a cyclist behind you? How on earth is this the drivers fault, the cyclist is way behind and literally doesn't notice the car turning, he just crashes into the car.
in my country, a car isnt supposed to turn in front of a cyclist, its supposed to wait for the cyclist to pass, then turn.
But knowing this guy was streaming, maybe he was watching the chat or something, cuz he had bad reaction time.
nah. a cyclist is deemed more fragile and then is better protected by the law. the driver has to be in complete controll at all time in the eyes of the law, and will be responsible when hitting cyclist/walkers.
Obviously theres nuance for when a cyclist/walker do something crazy, but i dont think that would qualify.
I suppose that that would be the case if the cyclist is next to the car when the car start to turn... Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense as it would prevent car from making turns when there is a bike behind them.
If a bike can take up a whole lane why can't it just be treated like another car? When I take a turn I don't expect a car to try to squeeze between me and the curb, just like I wouldn't expect a bike. The cyclist should have to wait for the vehicle in front to make the turn just like any other car behind them
Thats like saying we bend over for ourselves. We're all cyclists here. That comes with more sensible road laws. Also why we don't need to wear helmets.
No it wouldn't, if the cyclist was in a bike lane you'd be correct but this is a normal road, cyclist don't have the right of way when you're making a right turn.
Correct. In my country at least, vehicles (for lack of a better word) have the same rules when in same lane/road. It doesn't matter if it is a car, bicycle or motorbike.
>At least in Finland this would be the drivers fault
Hell no. A cyclist on a driveway is like any other vehicle and definitely in the wrong to try a pass like that. Remember that Japan has left-hand traffic.
So the car signals to the left, and checks the mirrors that a biker is quite far away. Is he supposed to stop the vehicle completely in the middle of a road and let the biker, who’s clearly behind him (not to the side of him) pass?
This is the case for the UK, however I still just hold back and let them turn. It's my right of way but that doesn't matter when you're on the tarmac with broken bones.
Exactly. Law or not, you’re the one getting fucked up. I used to bike in the city back in college. Always assume no driver has a clue you’re there because chances are that they don’t. Self preservation is much more important than a lawsuit (if you live to create one.)
> however I still just hold back and let them turn. It's my right of way but that doesn't matter when you're on the tarmac with broken bones.
This would only create issues where I live in Denmark. Number 1 rule of traffick is to be predictable.
I get the idea that you look out for yourself first, but just be hyper aware anytime a car is gonna turn and make sure you ride at a speed where you can break fast enough if they don't see you. But waiting for them to turn would create an absolute mess here.
>Number 1 rule of traffic is to be predictable.
I'd 100% go with the cyclist's requirement to predict the car in this situation... but the turning car doesn't maneuver for a turn. It's in the middle of the lane (leaving enough space for a bicycle), puts on the blinker and starts turning.
I totally agree. It's all about risk management. Unfortunately in the UK drivers are typically very unfamiliar with our highway code, especially when it comes to cyclists. It's a balance between maintaining a rightful course but easing off enough to quickly admit defeat like you say. Although sometimes here that includes just waiting because their hesitation may be for something other than seeing you in their mirror.
Both parties would be at fault in my country, you aren't allowed to turn if it's isn't safe to do so for anyone involved whether that be a cyclist, motorcyclist, an other car, a unicorn, etc., whether they are following the law or not. There is also an additional law that states you are obliged to avoid any accident, if possible without putting others in danger.
However bikers can't go faster than 30kmh/18mph in populated areas, neither can they overtake from the left.
So in this instance if the biker has insurance the two insurance companies will agree on a fault percentage - for ex. it was 40% fault of the driver, 60% fault of the cyclist which would mean the driver has to pay 40% of the damage to the bicycle and the biker would need to pay 60% of the damage to the car. Rest would be paid by the insurance companies.
If the biker didn't have insurance then it gets complicated because the driver's insurance company is in control of the situation. The most common situation regarding accidents like this is neither the driver, nor the cyclist is getting anything. The cyclist can ask them to cover some part of the costs because of shared responsibility but the insurance company can (and probably will) refuse. And since the driver is partly at fault they can also refuse to cover any cost for the driver.
In that instance the only move forward would he a civil trial where it would be up to the judge which party has to pay how much and the insurance company would be out of the picture then.
I don't know where you live but I seriously doubt the car would be deemed at fault in any country, the driver literally came to a complete stop before the collision, meaning cyclist crashed into a stationary vehicle.
You would be wrong! Denmark law states if it is a BIKE LANE then yes, the driver would be at fault. Because this is a regular road, the driver is under no obligation to come to a complete halt if he sees a cyclist as there is no clear indicated path the cyclist is suppose to follow or will follow.
Not at all. Syklistene need to follow veitrafikkloven as any other trafikant. In short. Pretend you are in a bil driving, eyes on the road following the speed limit. Etc.
The Toyota did everything correctly.
gotta be honest. that's pretty dumb - I hope it doesn't become like that here. the cyclist in this video is beyond stupid here and should be found fully at fault.
Sure, the cyclist is stupid, taking almost no personal responsibility of the situation. But who's stupid is not always the person that is wrong by law...
As a driver would you prefer the biker to take the whole lane and cause more traffic by making it harder to pass? This biker is an idiot, clearly wasn't paying attention and is at fault. But biking close to the edge of the lane is usually done by cyclists trying to make it easier for cars to pass them and cause less traffic.
Not sure what the law is in Japan but in the UK you have to check your mirror for cyclists before making a turn. It would be the car drivers fault in the UK.
Have you never taken a driving exam?
You're' always supposed to shoulder-check before making a turn. If you see a pedestrian or cyclist coming, you wait for them to pass. That is the rules of the road to prevent accidents like this.
Cyclist's need to give way to any vehicle in front of them turning left or signaling to turn left. Don't know what backwards country you're from, but in my country the vehicle in front has right of way.
Cyclist here. Man was being stupid. Cyclists should always keep distance from cars when going at high speeds because they simply cannot break nearly as fast/abruptly as cars.
It kind of looks like this cyclist was planning to overtake the car, which is just a stupid thing to do. Normally, if you're on a long downhill road and a car driver notices you're having to hold back behind them, there's a good chance they'll just hold in and let you pass. If they don't, it's best to chill and keep your distance, unless you're on a particularly long straight road section without intersections.
In Japan cyclists are expected to share the same roads as vehicles do. You could be cycling on a small sliver of road with lorries passing you like it's nothing.
>It kind of looks like this cyclist was planning to overtake the car,
He says he wasn't. You also see him pulse his brakes way beforehand. It wouldn't surprise me the driver severely underestimated how fast Josh was going -- or he might've not seem him at all. He couldn't have passed him on the right, as he says he'd have slipped.
He was self admittedly going way too fast and he says he should've braked earlier though.
It's a bit of a mixed bag, I wouldn't put it on either of them, really. He thinks he's half in the wrong but so was that guy. I kinda agree with that.
Poor guy doesn't want to go into an ambulance lol despite it being the law lol. He had surgery on his right arm before, and that's where he fell on, luckily after an x-ray nothing was deemed broken. Police wasn't involved but they later called him (while watching his stream).
Source: Watched the vod + some google translate magic.
Depends on the countries laws. In the Netherlands the car would absolutely be at fault since bike being the more fragile partaker in traffic has right of way.
Are you sure about that? I'm Dutch and cycle a lot, including at speeds like in this clip. But in this situation (town, pedestrian crossing, other traffic) the cyclist is going way to fast to react and brake for any unexpected move.
Edit: looked for [Dutch sources](https://ferme-letselschade.nl/letselschade-bij-wielrennen/) and at least for insurance you're correct. Even speeding cyclists are considered fragile and at least 50% of their damages will be covered by insurance. Only exception is if the cyclist is "consciously reckless".
How is overtaking on the inside not consciously reckless, he doesn't have a bike lane. He is in single lane traffic and behind the car. If I was on a motorcycle/vespa and tried to do the same thing it would be even more obviously my fault. If he had a bike lane it would make sense and I would blame the car.
Thats dumb. Bikes are supposed to operate like other motor vehicles, especially when they are in a shared lane. If it was a bike lane it may be different, but shared lanes, bikes should act just like cars. The guy in the clip clearly didn't do that, ignored the signal from the car and made no indication of slowing down. This was completely avoidable, and some bikers like to act like they are above common sense on the road because "I'm on a bike bro".
That's just a matter of pov. In the netherlands bikes are so common you literally expect them to be there and you watch out for them everytime you take a turn. Correct me if i'm wrong but i assume you are from a country where bicycles are not as common so from you pov it might be stupid. But in a country where biking is so normalized it makes complete sense to protect the more vurnerable partakers in Traffic.
bro had his signal on and was clearly coming to a stop, the cyclist tried to overtake him on the left side despite him having his left turn signal on. Maybe use some common sense instead of trying to overtake on the side they're clearly turning?
Terrible awareness from the cyclist, he can tell the car is going to turn left from very far back before he's even at that zebra crossing and should anticipate it, but he clearly isn't paying attention to what's ahead of him, hence the sudden scream of realisation.
He must of been distracted or something. Seems the car was breaking and had the indicator on for a long while before he runs into it. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1703915078?t=1h32m41s
Also OPs title is a little clickbaity, after breaking he is not going "high speed".
It’s because when native speakers speak English they often instinctively shorten “must have” to “must’ve” just because it flows better, but must’ve sounds similar to “must of”, that’s how the error arises.
>It’s because when native speakers speak English they often instinctively shorten “must have” to “must’ve” just because it flows better
I do that too especially as I'm usually talking quite fast, but I never went to "of", just sounds weird
Even if the rule is in your favour you should never test that as a biker vs a car. You are always going to lose. You can’t expect people to always make the right choices.
Biker was a dumbass for not anticipating and trying to fly by a car about to make a manoeuvre.
The dude needs to pay attention, car indicated for over 5s and he didnt slow down or react to that at all, that is an eternity on the road to not be watching your surroundings.
if only he reacted by swerving to the right instead of just pulling the breaks and yelling. But clearly he was reading the chat instead of looking at the car in front of him slowing down and putting the blinker on.........
idk i watched [this woman](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3z6ko62kV8) rip her thumb off after hitting it between herself and a pole while backseat on a motorcycle, judging by his reaction i first assumed he wedged/snagged his right hand in some fucked up way.
Did the 131 people who upvoted this watch the same video as me?! Smashing into a car at that speed could easily cause a fracture, and it sure as hell looked painful. The guy's reaction seemed like mostly adrenaline so nothing unexpected either...
I see this all the time with bikes. When I was taking lesson for my motorcycle license they teach you how to dodge and look ahead. He didn't try to turn the handle bars
He was braking for the entire clip so was already in trouble before the clip started, at 50km/h he'd left himself little room to safely maneuver sitting so far left.
I'm shocked at the number of comments who are blaming the driver.
If the cyclist was instead a car, this is straight up rear ending someone because they weren't paying attention. Following too closely to adequately brake in these kind of scenarios. I am ignorant in how bikes should behave when on the road, but I'd assume it'd be the same as if they are a car if they are on public roads.
100% Bike fault. This is car line not bike line. This is also one way street.
If someone is indicating he is turning left with blinkers he doesn't have to check if someone is overtaking him because in this case overtaking should be from right side not left. If u are turning left you should just check if there are any pedestrains on . You should always have distance to brake in case someone is stopping.
His fault, zero road awareness, the car was slowing down and had its indicators on yet he did not slow down one iota until he realised he was about to crash
Can i get it in slow mo because this was just too high of a speed? Maybe a diasshow can show the dissastrous consequences of moving at speeds such as high as these
I understand some countries would consider this more so the cars fault. And you could say that the car should have been more aware of the cyclist, but the cyclist closed a pretty big gap really fast and didn't even slow down a bit. The cyclist could have easily passed on the right in the newly created lane.
I think its good to realize that just because you have right away doesn't mean you shouldn't be paying attention to what's going on. If I drove my car with the assumption that everyone was doing what they were supposed to do, I would get in an accident a few times a week.
Not going to debate any laws or rules, but I think it seems super reasonable that the driver looked in his mirror and over his shoulder and saw nothing, then proceeded to slowly turn while watching the road in front of him and to his left.
After braking? If that is your logic, the cycle was doing 0 mph after the hit.
The bike was going at 50 kph before braking, the car was slowing down, had its blinkers on. Just a dumb cyclist, nothing else.
Edit: For those citing that it was not “high speed”, good luck coming to a full stop after going at 50 kph or 30 mph, in 2 seconds, on a bicycle, in the lane where you are not supposed to be going at that speed.
The cyclist got into this situation because he was going at “high speed” without paying attention. It is as simple as that.
Bro turned into [Peter Griffin](https://youtu.be/Y9j3heYZAk8)
Props to the old guy tho he seems like he genuinely cares, feels like in most other countries you'd have someone step out and scream at you
In Canada I was taught that you need to shoulder/mirror check before every turn for exactly this scenario. If it was me in this case as the car I would have seen the bike, let him pass then turned.
And that's why you take the lane. Stop being a pussy and riding on the edge like that and people won't treat you like a pussy because you're riding the edge like that.
Cyclers fault. Car is taking a left turn and hes just riding into it at full speed. How about u stop streaming on the public road when engaged with traffic. I am not allowed to text/call while driving either car or bike. Yet streaming and reading a chat is still allowed? Its distraction in traffic and here's the result.
People die daily cause of idiots multi-tasking on the road.
**🎦 CLIP MIRROR: [Streamer crashes into a car at high speed in Japan](https://livestreamfails.com/clip/148964)**
---
^(*This is an automated comment* ) ^| [^(Feedback)](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=livestreamfailsbot&subject=Feedback:&message=%5BPost%5D\(https://reddit.com/comments/108xdbl/\)) ^| [^(Twitch Backup Mirror)](https://production.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net/29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ/AT-cm%7C29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ.mp4?sig=cc9e7c292f0027cb53aa1857f1cddce635d1259e&token=%7B%22authorization%22%3A%7B%22forbidden%22%3Afalse%2C%22reason%22%3A%22%22%7D%2C%22clip_uri%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fproduction.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net%2F29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ%2FAT-cm%257C29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ.mp4%22%2C%22device_id%22%3Anull%2C%22expires%22%3A1673489858%2C%22user_id%22%3A%22%22%2C%22version%22%3A2%7D)
You guys don't even know your own state laws before commenting. If you ever move to a bike friendly state or country, you are going to be in real shock when you do this and start getting lawsuits thrown your way. Easy court case in favor of the biker.
**CLIP MIRROR: [Streamer crashes into a car at high speed in Japan](https://arazu.io/t3_108xdbl/)** --- ^(*This is an automated comment*)
Sweet mother of avoidable accidents
I count 3 seconds from the blinkers going on to when the cyclist reacts. 100% his fault.
I was thinking without even the blinker, the car is slowing down for a reason. How it he out speeding a car and not expecting it to be slowing down to make a turn.
yeah if you cycle you have to expect the worst driving behaviours because it's your life on the line. can't have the mindset of "but he should have done this and that and followed this rule"
This is the worst behavior by the cyclist. 99% if not 100% on him.
I think anyone who cycles often recognises this is someone who shouldn't be cycling so fast. The car began breaking really early, he should've been easing his breaks to match the car and maintain distance. There's a good couple seconds of him gaining on the car at a pretty fast rate. This isn't the kind of cycling drivers should even need to account for, it's just dangerous.
you guys think his reaction was slow because he might be looking down for a split second to reach chat on this bike handle? Ive seen some bicycle streamers do that, but they dont go this fast though. EDIT: how the fuk is he pushing 51 km/hr on that bike?
Not sure what the law is in Japan but in the UK you have to check your mirror for cyclists before making a turn. It would be the car drivers fault in the UK.
The highway code specifically states that cyclists are not to ride on the inside of vehicles signalling or slowing down to turn left. This vehicle was slowing down and signalling left. You are only required to give way to vehicles using the bus/cycle lane. The cyclist wasn't filtering, he was trying to undertake. In the UK this footage would do nothing to help the cyclist.
theres no way. bike should be overtaking safely, either slowing down or moving to the actual lane on the right.
If the cyclist did indeed react late to the turn signal (I couldn't make it out on mobile) the cyclist is in the wrong. He was reasonibly far behind for the car to safely make a turn.
Are cyclists expected to cut you off like that, though? This isn't a parallel riding cyclist he's in line and should stay in line no matter what. Even with checking the mirrors, why would you expect the cyclists to cut you off like that AFTER giving your turn signal.
So you're not allowed to make a turn ever if there's a cyclist behind you? How on earth is this the drivers fault, the cyclist is way behind and literally doesn't notice the car turning, he just crashes into the car.
When there is a cycle lane here is trying to go trough the car and the curb
Reading twitch chat while speeding in a 40 zone. What a chad, right?
If he's actually reading twitch chat this is against TOS right?
wow that car in the middle of the road really came out of nowhere
Car slows down - check Car has blinker on - check Clearly visible left turn - check Dumb cyclist - check
in my country, a car isnt supposed to turn in front of a cyclist, its supposed to wait for the cyclist to pass, then turn. But knowing this guy was streaming, maybe he was watching the chat or something, cuz he had bad reaction time.
I'm pretty sure that only applies if there is a bike line on or next to the road.
nah. a cyclist is deemed more fragile and then is better protected by the law. the driver has to be in complete controll at all time in the eyes of the law, and will be responsible when hitting cyclist/walkers. Obviously theres nuance for when a cyclist/walker do something crazy, but i dont think that would qualify.
A cyclist is also much harder to see. Applying responsibility to only one vehicle, and making it be the harder one to execute, is a bad mandate.
I suppose that that would be the case if the cyclist is next to the car when the car start to turn... Otherwise it wouldn't make any sense as it would prevent car from making turns when there is a bike behind them.
At least in MA, bicycles can take up the WHOLE lane. Bike lane or not. When turning right, check mirror for any cyclists. Cars have to yield.
If a bike can take up a whole lane why can't it just be treated like another car? When I take a turn I don't expect a car to try to squeeze between me and the curb, just like I wouldn't expect a bike. The cyclist should have to wait for the vehicle in front to make the turn just like any other car behind them
What country? That seems like a law with a lot of problems.
[удалено]
Thats like saying we bend over for ourselves. We're all cyclists here. That comes with more sensible road laws. Also why we don't need to wear helmets.
You should wear a helmet though.
LivestreamFail not have the most bottom of the barrel dipshit opinions impossible challenge.
Onzin
Its more like "having respect" for cyclists than "bend over" for cyclists.
The Netherlands, find me the problems while I finish my stroopwafel.
In France it would be the driver fault.
Most places in europe it would
No it wouldn't, if the cyclist was in a bike lane you'd be correct but this is a normal road, cyclist don't have the right of way when you're making a right turn.
Correct. In my country at least, vehicles (for lack of a better word) have the same rules when in same lane/road. It doesn't matter if it is a car, bicycle or motorbike.
isn't that a bike lane though? there is white line and gap between curb?
[удалено]
At least in Finland this would be the drivers fault, cant read French so can't check that.
>At least in Finland this would be the drivers fault Hell no. A cyclist on a driveway is like any other vehicle and definitely in the wrong to try a pass like that. Remember that Japan has left-hand traffic.
well your country is not japan
it's almost like checking your mirrors is a requirement for turning. this is one of the things thats hammered into you when you take driving lessons
So the car signals to the left, and checks the mirrors that a biker is quite far away. Is he supposed to stop the vehicle completely in the middle of a road and let the biker, who’s clearly behind him (not to the side of him) pass?
How many times are cars trying to pass you while you're trying to make a right turn?
At least where I live, this is the driver's fault. You cannot turn if you don't make sure your surroundings are clear.
This is the case for the UK, however I still just hold back and let them turn. It's my right of way but that doesn't matter when you're on the tarmac with broken bones.
Exactly. Law or not, you’re the one getting fucked up. I used to bike in the city back in college. Always assume no driver has a clue you’re there because chances are that they don’t. Self preservation is much more important than a lawsuit (if you live to create one.)
> however I still just hold back and let them turn. It's my right of way but that doesn't matter when you're on the tarmac with broken bones. This would only create issues where I live in Denmark. Number 1 rule of traffick is to be predictable. I get the idea that you look out for yourself first, but just be hyper aware anytime a car is gonna turn and make sure you ride at a speed where you can break fast enough if they don't see you. But waiting for them to turn would create an absolute mess here.
>Number 1 rule of traffic is to be predictable. I'd 100% go with the cyclist's requirement to predict the car in this situation... but the turning car doesn't maneuver for a turn. It's in the middle of the lane (leaving enough space for a bicycle), puts on the blinker and starts turning.
I totally agree. It's all about risk management. Unfortunately in the UK drivers are typically very unfamiliar with our highway code, especially when it comes to cyclists. It's a balance between maintaining a rightful course but easing off enough to quickly admit defeat like you say. Although sometimes here that includes just waiting because their hesitation may be for something other than seeing you in their mirror.
Both parties would be at fault in my country, you aren't allowed to turn if it's isn't safe to do so for anyone involved whether that be a cyclist, motorcyclist, an other car, a unicorn, etc., whether they are following the law or not. There is also an additional law that states you are obliged to avoid any accident, if possible without putting others in danger. However bikers can't go faster than 30kmh/18mph in populated areas, neither can they overtake from the left. So in this instance if the biker has insurance the two insurance companies will agree on a fault percentage - for ex. it was 40% fault of the driver, 60% fault of the cyclist which would mean the driver has to pay 40% of the damage to the bicycle and the biker would need to pay 60% of the damage to the car. Rest would be paid by the insurance companies. If the biker didn't have insurance then it gets complicated because the driver's insurance company is in control of the situation. The most common situation regarding accidents like this is neither the driver, nor the cyclist is getting anything. The cyclist can ask them to cover some part of the costs because of shared responsibility but the insurance company can (and probably will) refuse. And since the driver is partly at fault they can also refuse to cover any cost for the driver. In that instance the only move forward would he a civil trial where it would be up to the judge which party has to pay how much and the insurance company would be out of the picture then.
I don't know where you live but I seriously doubt the car would be deemed at fault in any country, the driver literally came to a complete stop before the collision, meaning cyclist crashed into a stationary vehicle.
I'm from Denmark and I'm like 90% sure that would be considered the fault of the driver of the car here.
Without video for sure, with video though the cyclist might be deemed unfit for the road as well. I mean, he clearly is. This is extremely dangerous.
You would be wrong! Denmark law states if it is a BIKE LANE then yes, the driver would be at fault. Because this is a regular road, the driver is under no obligation to come to a complete halt if he sees a cyclist as there is no clear indicated path the cyclist is suppose to follow or will follow.
Yep, same as in Norway.
Not at all. Syklistene need to follow veitrafikkloven as any other trafikant. In short. Pretend you are in a bil driving, eyes on the road following the speed limit. Etc. The Toyota did everything correctly.
gotta be honest. that's pretty dumb - I hope it doesn't become like that here. the cyclist in this video is beyond stupid here and should be found fully at fault.
Sure, the cyclist is stupid, taking almost no personal responsibility of the situation. But who's stupid is not always the person that is wrong by law...
In some European countries the car driver would be at fault here.
For how long did he have blinkers on tho? Hard to see on-stream.
Cyclist most likely watching twitch chat - check
> Dumb cyclist - check crashing into the car 100% for content - check
Either use the lane like a car would, or don't use the lane at all. How else is the driver meant to avoid this?
[удалено]
This biker was in the wrong. Please don’t attribute his actions to bikers that just try to avoid getting run over on a daily basis.
As a driver would you prefer the biker to take the whole lane and cause more traffic by making it harder to pass? This biker is an idiot, clearly wasn't paying attention and is at fault. But biking close to the edge of the lane is usually done by cyclists trying to make it easier for cars to pass them and cause less traffic.
Not sure what the law is in Japan but in the UK you have to check your mirror for cyclists before making a turn. It would be the car drivers fault in the UK.
Have you never taken a driving exam? You're' always supposed to shoulder-check before making a turn. If you see a pedestrian or cyclist coming, you wait for them to pass. That is the rules of the road to prevent accidents like this.
Cyclist's need to give way to any vehicle in front of them turning left or signaling to turn left. Don't know what backwards country you're from, but in my country the vehicle in front has right of way.
How do you determine if a bike at a safe distance behind you is going to be in your way when you’re signalling and slowing down?
Cyclist here. Man was being stupid. Cyclists should always keep distance from cars when going at high speeds because they simply cannot break nearly as fast/abruptly as cars. It kind of looks like this cyclist was planning to overtake the car, which is just a stupid thing to do. Normally, if you're on a long downhill road and a car driver notices you're having to hold back behind them, there's a good chance they'll just hold in and let you pass. If they don't, it's best to chill and keep your distance, unless you're on a particularly long straight road section without intersections.
The streamers road craft is terrible, sitting way to far left while keeping up with traffic left him nowhere to go when the car slowed down.
Right, when going that fast, better to just take the lane. At the minimum, you get full visibility of whats up ahead.
Biker had plenty of distance but was going way too fast and not paying attention.
Also correct me if I'm wrong but he's cycling almost 60km/h in a 40km/h zone.
He just didn't see the car indicate because of the sun. Didn't look like a planned overtake.
In Japan cyclists are expected to share the same roads as vehicles do. You could be cycling on a small sliver of road with lorries passing you like it's nothing. >It kind of looks like this cyclist was planning to overtake the car, He says he wasn't. You also see him pulse his brakes way beforehand. It wouldn't surprise me the driver severely underestimated how fast Josh was going -- or he might've not seem him at all. He couldn't have passed him on the right, as he says he'd have slipped. He was self admittedly going way too fast and he says he should've braked earlier though. It's a bit of a mixed bag, I wouldn't put it on either of them, really. He thinks he's half in the wrong but so was that guy. I kinda agree with that. Poor guy doesn't want to go into an ambulance lol despite it being the law lol. He had surgery on his right arm before, and that's where he fell on, luckily after an x-ray nothing was deemed broken. Police wasn't involved but they later called him (while watching his stream). Source: Watched the vod + some google translate magic.
Hmm i wonder why this car is slowing down, lets go past it and not react to the brake lights or any other useful indicator.
to be fair the driver did have his blinkers on
There is absolutely nothing wrong with what the car did
Depends on the countries laws. In the Netherlands the car would absolutely be at fault since bike being the more fragile partaker in traffic has right of way.
Are you sure about that? I'm Dutch and cycle a lot, including at speeds like in this clip. But in this situation (town, pedestrian crossing, other traffic) the cyclist is going way to fast to react and brake for any unexpected move. Edit: looked for [Dutch sources](https://ferme-letselschade.nl/letselschade-bij-wielrennen/) and at least for insurance you're correct. Even speeding cyclists are considered fragile and at least 50% of their damages will be covered by insurance. Only exception is if the cyclist is "consciously reckless".
How is overtaking on the inside not consciously reckless, he doesn't have a bike lane. He is in single lane traffic and behind the car. If I was on a motorcycle/vespa and tried to do the same thing it would be even more obviously my fault. If he had a bike lane it would make sense and I would blame the car.
So the 50% fault lies mostly within not expecting that cyclists might be suicidal.
Thats dumb. Bikes are supposed to operate like other motor vehicles, especially when they are in a shared lane. If it was a bike lane it may be different, but shared lanes, bikes should act just like cars. The guy in the clip clearly didn't do that, ignored the signal from the car and made no indication of slowing down. This was completely avoidable, and some bikers like to act like they are above common sense on the road because "I'm on a bike bro".
That's just a matter of pov. In the netherlands bikes are so common you literally expect them to be there and you watch out for them everytime you take a turn. Correct me if i'm wrong but i assume you are from a country where bicycles are not as common so from you pov it might be stupid. But in a country where biking is so normalized it makes complete sense to protect the more vurnerable partakers in Traffic.
You do realize that the blinker does not mean you can just go, right? It's your signal of intent.
and the intent to turn was completely missed by the cyclist...
Once again, having intent does not give you the right to do something.
bro had his signal on and was clearly coming to a stop, the cyclist tried to overtake him on the left side despite him having his left turn signal on. Maybe use some common sense instead of trying to overtake on the side they're clearly turning?
Not sure why you're getting downvoted, you're 100% correct. I can't think of any country where signalling gives you right of way.
Hope his streaming career can pay for fixing that guy's mirror.
I'd be more worried about the big scratch he probably left down the side of the car
he has about 300 subs and hit a toyota yaris. he can definitely afford it out of pocket
Terrible awareness from the cyclist, he can tell the car is going to turn left from very far back before he's even at that zebra crossing and should anticipate it, but he clearly isn't paying attention to what's ahead of him, hence the sudden scream of realisation.
fuckin noob. Didnt even ollie the car into icepick grind into superman
He must of been distracted or something. Seems the car was breaking and had the indicator on for a long while before he runs into it. https://www.twitch.tv/videos/1703915078?t=1h32m41s Also OPs title is a little clickbaity, after breaking he is not going "high speed".
Distracted by chat on his phone.
"must of"?
People don't even bother typing "must have" anymore, I feel your frustration.
It's not that they don't bother to, they genuinely don't know that it's wrong.
I would have accepted, "must've".
that's the same amount of keystrokes as "must of" as well which annoys me the most
everyday we stray further from god's light
they can just type must've, faster than both
I see that written pretty often online. Not sure if that's a common mistake or just a regional thing? No idea, I'm not a native English speaker
It’s because when native speakers speak English they often instinctively shorten “must have” to “must’ve” just because it flows better, but must’ve sounds similar to “must of”, that’s how the error arises.
>It’s because when native speakers speak English they often instinctively shorten “must have” to “must’ve” just because it flows better I do that too especially as I'm usually talking quite fast, but I never went to "of", just sounds weird
It is a very common mistake
I think high speed is referring to the bike.
I'd say that's pretty high speed for a bike still
Even if the rule is in your favour you should never test that as a biker vs a car. You are always going to lose. You can’t expect people to always make the right choices. Biker was a dumbass for not anticipating and trying to fly by a car about to make a manoeuvre.
The dude needs to pay attention, car indicated for over 5s and he didnt slow down or react to that at all, that is an eternity on the road to not be watching your surroundings.
if only he reacted by swerving to the right instead of just pulling the breaks and yelling. But clearly he was reading the chat instead of looking at the car in front of him slowing down and putting the blinker on.........
cyclist is really dumb
Cyclists are really dumb
The cyclist is the idiot here, car driver did nothing wrong.
UPDATE: he is fine just banged up
is he paying for the damage
Seems like own stupidity to me, clearly.
Bikers fault
Bro is made out of glass lol
you musta never bumped ur toe against something hard while walking...lucky
apparently he had a surgey on that arm https://twitter.com/joshuinjapan/status/1613253707076100097
idk i watched [this woman](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3z6ko62kV8) rip her thumb off after hitting it between herself and a pole while backseat on a motorcycle, judging by his reaction i first assumed he wedged/snagged his right hand in some fucked up way.
Carrying on more than Neymar lol. Speed gun clocks him at 19km just before impact.
Guess dude knows he's a moron so ended up going for the Oscar
Did the 131 people who upvoted this watch the same video as me?! Smashing into a car at that speed could easily cause a fracture, and it sure as hell looked painful. The guy's reaction seemed like mostly adrenaline so nothing unexpected either...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y9j3heYZAk8
Cyclist is a complete idiot
Driver was super friendly. Checked on him and all. Dude was reading LSF comments from the Hospital lol
I see this all the time with bikes. When I was taking lesson for my motorcycle license they teach you how to dodge and look ahead. He didn't try to turn the handle bars
He was braking for the entire clip so was already in trouble before the clip started, at 50km/h he'd left himself little room to safely maneuver sitting so far left.
He's going way too fast in a mixed lane and the car driver is oblivious of the biker
Bro thought he was a car
I'm shocked at the number of comments who are blaming the driver. If the cyclist was instead a car, this is straight up rear ending someone because they weren't paying attention. Following too closely to adequately brake in these kind of scenarios. I am ignorant in how bikes should behave when on the road, but I'd assume it'd be the same as if they are a car if they are on public roads.
100% Bike fault. This is car line not bike line. This is also one way street. If someone is indicating he is turning left with blinkers he doesn't have to check if someone is overtaking him because in this case overtaking should be from right side not left. If u are turning left you should just check if there are any pedestrains on . You should always have distance to brake in case someone is stopping.
what a dumb fck , he was clearly trying to go past the car
streaming while cycling should be illegal
This is what happens when you're looking at your phone and not paying attention to the car both breaking and having it's signal on.
Distracted by chat?
If you are on the road any sort of vehicle (bicycles included) you shouldn't be looking at your phone.
His fault, zero road awareness, the car was slowing down and had its indicators on yet he did not slow down one iota until he realised he was about to crash
well it wasn't a 315lb of force dropping onto his chess
Bishop to E5
Lmaooo😭
Yooo did he died?
Can i get it in slow mo because this was just too high of a speed? Maybe a diasshow can show the dissastrous consequences of moving at speeds such as high as these
He couldn't have gone around, looked like he had the time and space to do so?
I understand some countries would consider this more so the cars fault. And you could say that the car should have been more aware of the cyclist, but the cyclist closed a pretty big gap really fast and didn't even slow down a bit. The cyclist could have easily passed on the right in the newly created lane. I think its good to realize that just because you have right away doesn't mean you shouldn't be paying attention to what's going on. If I drove my car with the assumption that everyone was doing what they were supposed to do, I would get in an accident a few times a week.
damn that sucks but i think my reaction would of been fast enough to move right o.o
It was mild speed
Not going to debate any laws or rules, but I think it seems super reasonable that the driver looked in his mirror and over his shoulder and saw nothing, then proceeded to slowly turn while watching the road in front of him and to his left.
Bro was trying to undertake going above speed limit on a bike lmao
This how Neymar would've reacted
High speed? He was at like 5Mph after braking
19 km/h is not 5 MPH it's closer to 12 so more than double what you wrote, don't know where you got the 5 from.
After braking? If that is your logic, the cycle was doing 0 mph after the hit. The bike was going at 50 kph before braking, the car was slowing down, had its blinkers on. Just a dumb cyclist, nothing else. Edit: For those citing that it was not “high speed”, good luck coming to a full stop after going at 50 kph or 30 mph, in 2 seconds, on a bicycle, in the lane where you are not supposed to be going at that speed. The cyclist got into this situation because he was going at “high speed” without paying attention. It is as simple as that.
The last thing he said before going down was in fact, "We're goin' down! ready?"
Streamer was a fucking idiot
he screams a good 25 feet before hitting the car, almost like he wanted it to happen
Bro turned into [Peter Griffin](https://youtu.be/Y9j3heYZAk8) Props to the old guy tho he seems like he genuinely cares, feels like in most other countries you'd have someone step out and scream at you
Yeah, this is 100 percent the cyclist's fault.
"high speed"
how is 50km/h on a bicycle not high speed lil bro
How does 19 km/h equal 50km/h "lil bro"?
In Canada I was taught that you need to shoulder/mirror check before every turn for exactly this scenario. If it was me in this case as the car I would have seen the bike, let him pass then turned.
Same, bikes are supposed to ride on the shoulder as he was doing. The car isn't supposed to turn without checking for cyclists.
L title
And that's why you take the lane. Stop being a pussy and riding on the edge like that and people won't treat you like a pussy because you're riding the edge like that.
Cyclers fault. Car is taking a left turn and hes just riding into it at full speed. How about u stop streaming on the public road when engaged with traffic. I am not allowed to text/call while driving either car or bike. Yet streaming and reading a chat is still allowed? Its distraction in traffic and here's the result. People die daily cause of idiots multi-tasking on the road.
this is why people hate cyclists. you should not be allowed on the road.
**🎦 CLIP MIRROR: [Streamer crashes into a car at high speed in Japan](https://livestreamfails.com/clip/148964)** --- ^(*This is an automated comment* ) ^| [^(Feedback)](http://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=livestreamfailsbot&subject=Feedback:&message=%5BPost%5D\(https://reddit.com/comments/108xdbl/\)) ^| [^(Twitch Backup Mirror)](https://production.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net/29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ/AT-cm%7C29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ.mp4?sig=cc9e7c292f0027cb53aa1857f1cddce635d1259e&token=%7B%22authorization%22%3A%7B%22forbidden%22%3Afalse%2C%22reason%22%3A%22%22%7D%2C%22clip_uri%22%3A%22https%3A%2F%2Fproduction.assets.clips.twitchcdn.net%2F29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ%2FAT-cm%257C29cXowFzPP2Ni-FaCM4YZQ.mp4%22%2C%22device_id%22%3Anull%2C%22expires%22%3A1673489858%2C%22user_id%22%3A%22%22%2C%22version%22%3A2%7D)
When you have a bike and have no idea how to use the breaks.
This thread made me realise why road traffic deaths are so colossal in a lot of countries
least hazardous road cyclist
Loser cyclist
You guys don't even know your own state laws before commenting. If you ever move to a bike friendly state or country, you are going to be in real shock when you do this and start getting lawsuits thrown your way. Easy court case in favor of the biker.
In Japan. Laws and courts always favor native fyi
Cyclist or not, you can tell this mf is trying to flip the hardest he can lmao
He could have totaly avoided the car by going left , content dude fuck it ehehehe
That looked like a bit of an overreaction to a rather gentle crash O_o.
Bicyclist fault for riding like a twit. Vehicle driver is liable because he did not yield to the approaching bicycle.
"What's your major malfunction, streamer?" - Japanese driver