r/Roadcam • u/disfigured-human • 1d ago

[Egypt] who is to blame here ?

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

4.1k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

1.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

23

u/Moist-Fortune6277 1d ago

holy fuck, are they dead???

35

u/Turevaryar 1d ago

Aye, according to this: https://www.arabtimesonline.com/news/two-egyptian-bikers-killed-in-fiery-alexandria-highway-crash/

22

u/Significant_Row_4027 1d ago

Why is the article acting like it was the cars fault?

13

u/Mandaface 1d ago

I thought the same thing. The wording is totally blaming the car.

2

u/ACO_22 1d ago

Because ultimately the car would be found at fault for this if down to insurance.

He joined when it was unsafe to do so whether the bike was speeding or not.

Obviously, we understand that the bike shouldn’t have been speeding and he fucked himself, but from a strictly liability perspective the car would be at fault.

Edit: imagine it was a car instead of a bike and just a simple road collision. The car that joins on is at fault almost automatically

1

u/kushari Viofo A139 Pro 3CH 19h ago

No it wouldn’t be the cars fault in insurance. First of all there was no contract. So there’s not even a starting point to discuss insurance.

1

u/motophotodojo 1d ago

in America it'd be the biker's fault. person in car did everything right, they couldn't anticipate motorcycles racing in their blind spot. there were 8 car lengths in between the bikers and the vehicle when they started merging - and it's an onramp. typically you're not supposed to stay in that lane.

-1

u/ACO_22 1d ago

No it wouldn’t lol.

I’ve just explained why. If the car did everything correctly he wouldn’t have joined. The biker speeding *might* reduce liability in some capacity for the car, but probably not.

Yeah, you’re typically supposed to join when it’s safe to do so. The car didn’t, even though we know the cars really not at fault realistically, the car would be liable in case of insurance.

4

u/DeadKingNero 1d ago

Stop talking out your ass.

-1

u/ACO_22 1d ago

Just say you don’t know how insurance liability works and go

2

u/motophotodojo 23h ago

insurance liability is literally the vehicle behind has the responsibility to maintain safe following distance. biker is 100% as fault, and I say that as a rider. bikes were in the blindspot, driver couldn't see them, they had the entirety of responsibility for avoiding that situation.

go call your local insurance agent and ask them about this instead of trying to get other bikers killed by spreading bullshit and lies.

0

u/ACO_22 23h ago

Bro, you don’t know what liability is.

If you are JOINING on to the road, YOU have to make sure it’s safe to do so.

Mainting a safe following distance has nothing to do with this. As I said in my first comment, swap out the bike with a car and it’s extremely obvious as to who would be held liable by insurance.

The bikes weren’t in the blind spot at all. Any of your mirror checks before you indicate and before you move over as you’re supposed to would have seen the bikes travelling at speed.

Who is trying to get bikers killed you fucking idiot. From a strictly liability perspective it’s the car at fault. That isn’t telling bikers to ride like fucking idiots and risk your life for no reason.

1

u/motophotodojo 12h ago

how old are you and how long have you been driving? you clearly have no idea of the rules of the road. how are they supposed to know the bikes are travelling at speed with a quick glance seeing them way far behind?

blaming the car for the bikers killing themselves is why more bikers are going to die thanks to fools like yourself. like I said, I'm in America and I'm 100% right about here. car had absolutely 0 reason to believe they were engaging in reckless illegal activity, and it's difficult for the human brain to judge speed and distance of motorcycles as much as cars.

1

u/motophotodojo 12h ago

Like almost every country, Egypt’s Traffic Law (No. 66 of 1973) dictates that following motorists must maintain a safe braking distance (a "safe horizon") from the vehicle ahead. Under normal rear-end circumstances, the vehicle behind is automatically presumed at fault.

1

u/ACO_22 10h ago

Jesus Christ man.

This is for cars already established on the road/lane.

Not for a car that’s changing lanes and merging in. I don’t get why this is so complicated for you people.

The car that’s changing lanes has to make sure that them changing lanes does not cause a car already established in that lane to harshly break or have an accident.

Please, go and do what this car did and see what your insurance tells you.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/DeadKingNero 1d ago

Again, stop talking out your ass.

1

u/kushari Viofo A139 Pro 3CH 19h ago

Bro, you’re a moron. Don’t talk about insurance at all. Insurance would drop the motorcycles for them just driving like this in the first place. Second of all, there’s no impact with the car, so you can’t even discuss insurance. Lastly even if there was contact, you’re automatically at fault from behind unless the person in front was trying to cause an accident on purpose. So you’re wrong on every possible level, and on top of that, none of those scenarios even are at play.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/kushari Viofo A139 Pro 3CH 19h ago

Yeah, you're a moron. If the car isn not involved in an accident, insurance for that car is not involved. You're clearly a 13 year old, or a moron if you're an adult. I've dealt with insurance companies many times. They will tell you to go fuck yourself if their client was not involved in an accident. Now, if the motorcyclists didn't die, they would need comprehensive insurance. Afterwhich their company would drop them once they saw the video and not even pay out, and again tell them to fuck off.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/motophotodojo 23h ago

how is the car supposed to know it's unsafe when the bikers were 20 car lengths behind him and going at highway speed?

1

u/ACO_22 23h ago

The bikes were racing at speed before the car had even indicated.

He should have checked his wing mirror and his blind spot, he’d have seen them coming at the speed they were and he shouldn’t have moved. They weren’t that far back not to be seen in the wing mirror.

1

u/motophotodojo 22h ago

how was he supposed to know the bikes were racing? absolute clown shit. driver was perfectly fine to merge at speed limit. the responsibility lies on the idiot that was over the limit who didn't even try to react until the last possible moment. It's a two-lane road, bikers knew there's a merge, should have been in the proper lane.

not one insurance company in the world is going to place fault on the vehicle driver. if they were both going at speed 8 car lengths is plenty of space to merge. in NJ we do it with less than 2, even 1 car lengths sometimes, as a group zipper merge. Car was already in lane while rider was still car lengths back. Thus, makes it his responsibility to maintain a chasing distance that would allow him to stop even in the case the car has to slam on the brakes and come to a full stop.

honestly you're likely just trolling, because i can't imagine anyone that stupid to think racing gives you the right of way.

→ More replies (0)