Dash cam thread (car videos only)

frozenfrozen

That's the kind of accident I'm really afraid of, there's nothing you can do to avoid that happening to you.

Only 15 months and 3 years ban for such profound injuries to all those people purely because of his negligence. Give him 5 years and a lifetime driving ban. If he had sleep apnoea he shouldn't have been anywhere near the wheel of that.

bear1

frozenfrozen wrote: »

That's the kind of accident I'm really afraid of, there's nothing you can do to avoid that happening to you.

Only 15 months and 3 years ban for such profound injuries to all those people purely because of his negligence. Give him 5 years and a lifetime driving ban. If he had sleep apnoea he shouldn't have been anywhere near the wheel of that.

The question also has to be asked if his company knew of his condition? I imagine their insurers will be querying this too.

CreepingDeath

frozenfrozen wrote: »

Only 15 months and 3 years ban for such profound injuries to all those people purely because of his negligence. Give him 5 years and a lifetime driving ban. If he had sleep apnoea he shouldn't have been anywhere near the wheel of that.

Just in case people are mixing the two up sleep apnea is different from narcolepsy. Anyone with narcolepsy can suddenly fall asleep at any time in the day and should be permanently banned from driving.

Sleep apnea is where someone stops breathing at night in their sleep and their body wakes them up suddenly to breath.
So they are always getting a bad nights sleep.

But depending on the degree of that, it may be no more than new parents being woken up by babies, noisy neighbours etc.

Special Circumstances

CreepingDeath wrote: »

Just in case people are mixing the two up sleep apnea is different from narcolepsy. Anyone with narcolepsy can suddenly fall asleep at any time in the day and should be permanently banned from driving.

Sleep apnea is where someone stops breathing at night in their sleep and their body wakes them up suddenly to breath.
So they are always getting a bad nights sleep.

But depending on the degree of that, it may be no more than new parents being woken up by babies, noisy neighbours etc.

It is however a notifiable condition for the DVLA.

madalig12

xabi wrote: »

Jaysus, was that all from one clip?

Edit: just spotted the date stamp on the video. That undertake on the H/S is mad.

No two different days but the 3 things on the one small stretch of dual carriageway is the norm in that part of road.

madalig12

madalig12 wrote: »

No two different days but the 3 things on the one small stretch of dual carriageway is the norm in that part of road.

That overtake was almost exactly where there has been at least 3 accidents inside a year an a half including one fatality. The guy who got undertook was doing 80kph. Totally unnecessary as I was able to overtake shortly afterwards as is shown.

seagull

Special Circumstances wrote: »

It is however a notifiable condition for the DVLA.

And grounds for not being allowed to drive heavy vehicles. He'd consulted his GP about this, so he can't plead ignorance of having the condition. A professional driver should know the rules. I suspect he was probably well aware that he should have been off the road, but it's hard to walk away from your livelihood.

DopeTech

Trebor176 wrote: »

The undertaker is definitely over the limit.

How do you know his occupation?! :D

simdan

Short Clip from today

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxMx0bCPHfc

kiddums

madalig12 wrote: »

No two different days but the 3 things on the one small stretch of dual carriageway is the norm in that part of road.

I'll back you up on that one, I drive that road every day. I honestly don't know why I'm still surprised by it.
I really must get myself a dashcam too.

whiskeyman

frozenfrozen wrote: »

That's the kind of accident I'm really afraid of, there's nothing you can do to avoid that happening to you.

Having done an advanced drivers course in the past, the instructor gave me some good advice.

When parked / stopped at a traffic light, and especially when no cars stopped behind you, you should be frequently monitoring your rear mirror to check for fast traffic approaching behind you.
It could give you vital warning seconds for evasive maneuver or at least brace for impact.
It's something I never considered before, as you nearly always just focus out ahead / at the lights when stopped.

Falcon L

whiskeyman wrote: »

Having done an advanced drivers course in the past, the instructor gave me some good advice.

When parked / stopped at a traffic light, and especially when no cars stopped behind you, you should be frequently monitoring your rear mirror to check for fast traffic approaching behind you.
It could give you vital warning seconds for evasive maneuver or at least brace for impact.
It's something I never considered before, as you nearly always just focus out ahead / at the lights when stopped.

And of course, a vital part of that strategy is not to be stuck up the bumper of the car in front. If you can't see where the tyres of the car in front meet the road, you're too close.

b318isp

whiskeyman wrote: »

Having done an advanced drivers course in the past, the instructor gave me some good advice.

When parked / stopped at a traffic light, and especially when no cars stopped behind you, you should be frequently monitoring your rear mirror to check for fast traffic approaching behind you.
It could give you vital warning seconds for evasive maneuver or at least brace for impact.
It's something I never considered before, as you nearly always just focus out ahead / at the lights when stopped.

And keep your foot on the brake slightly to keep the brake lights on.

chewed

whiskeyman wrote: »

Having done an advanced drivers course in the past, the instructor gave me some good advice.

When parked / stopped at a traffic light, and especially when no cars stopped behind you, you should be frequently monitoring your rear mirror to check for fast traffic approaching behind you.
It could give you vital warning seconds for evasive maneuver or at least brace for impact.
It's something I never considered before, as you nearly always just focus out ahead / at the lights when stopped.

I do this all the time since my near death encounter with the van skidding to halt behind me! I'm always aware of traffic behind and sometimes deliberately slow down, tapping the brakes, well before the turn off.

kirving

I do this too after being rear ended before. If I'm the last car in a queue, I'll sit there tapping the brake pedal to flash the lights until the car behind me comes slows down and stops.

the_pen_turner

Kevin Irving wrote: »

I do this too after being rear ended before. If I'm the last car in a queue, I'll sit there tapping the brake pedal to flash the lights until the car behind me comes slows down and stops.

why don't you use your hazard lights , that's what they are for.

if I saw a car tapping the brakes I would assume it was still moving and not stopped

Caliden

the_pen_turner wrote: »

why don't you use your hazard lights , that's what they are for.

if I saw a car tapping the brakes I would assume it was still moving and not stopped

Why would you put your hazards on? Seems a bit OTT

the_pen_turner

Caliden wrote: »

Why would you put your hazards on? Seems a bit OTT

because you are nervous that an vehicle bight not see you and not be able to stop in time.

surely sitting in the road stopped is a hazard.

if im stopped at the back of a queue or at road works I will put on my hazards to highlight that im stopped.

Falcon L

Caliden wrote: »

Why would you put your hazards on? Seems a bit OTT

It's very common around Europe. Last car in a line of traffic will nearly always have hazards on. I think it's a good practice

Alun

Falcon L wrote: »

It's very common around Europe. Last car in a line of traffic will nearly always have hazards on. I think it's a good practice

Yes it is, if it's in an unexpected situation like with traffic suddenly coming to a halt on a motorway, but not as a routine thing when stopping at traffic lights. That's just way OTT.

Maximus Alexander

I would have thought a lot of Irish road users would interpret hazards as "I'm stuck here so you better go around me".

the_pen_turner

Alun wrote: »

Yes it is, if it's in an unexpected situation like with traffic suddenly coming to a halt on a motorway, but not as a routine thing when stopping at traffic lights. That's just way OTT.

I agree that its ott at normal traffic lights . I would only do it at road work ones or if it was unexpectedly long etc.

im only suggesting the hazards to the nervous poster . tapping the brakes doesn't help at all

the_pen_turner

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

I would have thought a lot of Irish road users would interpret hazards as "I'm stuck here so you better go around me".

or I couldn't be bothered finding a parking spot so im going to abandon my car here

savagethegoat

Falcon L wrote: »

It's very common around Europe. Last car in a line of traffic will nearly always have hazards on. I think it's a good practice

I thought it was pretty well universal practise, I'm a bit shocked that users of Motors don't do this automatically, never mind all the other road users who have possibly less of the outlook of an Enthusiast,

fullstop

madalig12 wrote: »

That overtake was almost exactly where there has been at least 3 accidents inside a year an a half including one fatality. The guy who got undertook was doing 80kph. Totally unnecessary as I was able to overtake shortly afterwards as is shown.

Is the undertake on the road between Letterkenny and Derry?

kiddums

fullstop wrote: »

Is the undertake on the road between Letterkenny and Derry?

Yeah, its on theLletterkenny side of Newtowncunningham if I'm not mistaken.
All the clips look like they're going from Derry to Letterkenny

madalig12

kiddums wrote: »

Yeah, its on theLletterkenny side of Newtowncunningham if I'm not mistaken.
All the clips look like they're going from Derry to Letterkenny

Yep just beside that house that always sells spuds. 100% correct.

Sterling Archer

I have always used hazards when stopped at the end of a queue or at temp traffic lights, but 95% of my driving is done outside cities and towns

kirving

I'd always use hazards on a fast moving road, if I came to a stop or slowed suddenly. In fact my car does it automatically if the braking is hard enough.

Anyway, more videos!

dashcam5586

Taking 4th exit, had my indicator on. Don't think they even registered I was there. Although technically I was in the right, I should have anticipated it. Saw it coming and just presumed they were going to yield.

somebody embedd please

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wSdwJ0taYIs

savagethegoat

not just technically, absolutely in the right, indicating or not.

conzy

Is that at the butts in Kilkenny? A lot of people just dont even treat that as a roundabout. The amount of times I nearly got T boned there even taking the 3rd exit is ridiculous. You were 100% correct

As a rule of thumb, whenever I'm taking the 4th exit / all the way around a roundabout I just assume people are going to hit me and give them a wide berth

whiskeyman

Saw this in the news.
Awful case.
Hope he gets the full weight of the law against him.
If those were my kids, I'd want him dead :mad:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxGWcowTxOI

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-36391976

Two young sisters were left paralysed after a Jaguar Land Rover manager smashed his 4x4 into their father's car during a "bullying" road rage chase, a court heard.
Katrina and Karlina Raiba, aged five and eight, were left with life-changing injuries in the crash on the A509 near Wellingborough, Northamptonshire.
Before the crash, Andrew Nay had been tailgating and "bullying" another driver, Northampton Crown Court heard.
He is due to be sentenced on Friday.
The judge said the evidence against Nay during the three-day trial was "overwhelming".
He had admitted four counts of causing serious injury by dangerous driving but denied chasing the Mazda before hitting the victims' Vauxhall Signum.
Judge Adrienne Lucking QC rejected Nay's testimony that he had noticed "nothing in particular" during his journey and was turning into a garden centre in his Land Rover Discovery when the crash happened.
'Devastating consequences'
During the trial, the court heard witness accounts of his "absolutely ridiculous" right-hand turn across oncoming traffic on 3 October last year.
Judge Lucking ruled Nay, of Harrier Close, Weldon, Corby, had "harried" the Mazda people carrier after being prevented from leaving a roundabout on the A14.
"I have heard evidence from a series of witnesses travelling in the same direction as the Land Rover," she told the court.
"In each case their evidence was given in measured terms, without exaggeration.
"By contrast I found the defendant's evidence unconvincing and inconsistent."
Katrina and Karlia's parents said Nay's "reckless actions" had "devastating consequences" for the girls.
"Every day they ask 'when will we start feeling our legs again?' They think it's going to get better and it's too hard to tell them," they said.
Nay was told an immediate custodial sentence could be handed down.

josip

whiskeyman wrote: »

Saw this in the news.
Awful case.
Hope he gets the full weight of the law against him.
If those were my kids, I'd want him dead :mad:

Yeah, it's very hard to argue against the death penalty for something like this.
The maximum sentence he can get is 5 years while those 2 girls are paralysed for life.
Doesn't seem like justice.

Special Circumstances

What a complete and utter @sshole. And then to try and bluff his way out of it afterwards. "the big man" when he was driving the land rover but not big enough to deal with the consequences of his actions. Scum. Beneath contempt.

kirving

He drove like that very deliberately. Attempted murder should be the charge. Should be sued for every penny he has in addition to insurance.

Caliden

Kevin Irving wrote: »

He drove like that very deliberately. Attempted murder should be the charge. Should be sued for every penny he has in addition to insurance.

I think he was more concerned with chasing the grey mpv that had just taken the turn than anything else.

Voodoomelon

Horrifying.

mrsoundie

He just got 4 and a half years. Not enough.

whiskeyman

Special Circumstances wrote: »

What a complete and utter @sshole. And then to try and bluff his way out of it afterwards. "the big man" when he was driving the land rover but not big enough to deal with the consequences of his actions. Scum. Beneath contempt.

This is what really gets to me too.
I'd be amazed if his lawyers told him to go against it and deny his driving on the day... surely they'd understand the evidence against him and tell him to fess up and plead for leniency.
This is all the more reason he should get a much large sentence.
4 and a half years for this is an absolute joke. Such driving offences really need to be put on par with attempted murder as already mentioned here.

Anyway, sorry for the rants.
Hopefully other not as tragic vids come soon enough

Homer

Really shows the value of having even a cheap dashcam fitted. Without the footage it would be much easier for him to try blame someone else or feign innocence. Scary there are lunatics out there on the road in every country!

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.

UsedToWait

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Probably for another country rather - if that's your concept of justice, might I suggest, say, Syria...

Sterling Archer

Patww79 wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Ya not really to spot for it, he should have to "pay for all future treatment needed as a result of the injuries sustained because of his actions"

josip

Shane_ef wrote: »

Ya not really to spot for it, he should have to "pay for all future treatment needed as a result of the injuries sustained because of his actions"

Fcuk it lads, I'd rather be broke and have the use of my legs than have the best wheelchair on the market.
I know that's not what you meant and there's nothing that can be done to change what's already happened, but it's heart wrenching to think of 2 kids who'll never walk/run/jump again.
And to watch the moment that it happens is so scary.
I don't think I would have been so upset by it before I was a dad but having kids their age and seeing that sometimes things just happen and there's bugger all you can do to stop it.

Special Circumstances

josip wrote: »

it's heart wrenching to think of 2 kids who'll never walk/run/jump again.
And to watch the moment that it happens is so scary.
.

The first person view is frightening. Could be any one of us on the receiving end. This clip should be part of some kinda anti-road-rage campaign - "just let it go - don't be this @sshole"

PauloMN

That clip is horrific. To think the moment those poor little girls lost use of their legs is captured in that split-second part of the video is surreal.

Awful story. That's one of the clips I'll be showing my son when he's old enough to start driving.

He defo should have known better at 39 years of age, and I don't think I'd have done anything quite that stupid ever in my driving lifetime, but I think we all should be honest with ourselves and think "jaysus I've done some stupid stuff in cars which could have caused a bad accident".

It certainly made me think, and videos like that should be used to educate drivers. Whatever about hard-hitting ad campaigns, seeing it in real life is an eye-opener.

CiniO

Putting aside if it was road rage or not, and what were his reasons for turning right without giving way to oncoming car, all that happened was that he actually did turn right without checking for oncoming traffic.

Things like that happen every single day everywhere, and it hardly makes any difference if it's due to road rage, lack of concentration, tiredness, drunkness, etc...

I encounter people doing stupid manouvers like that nearly on daily basis here in the west of Ireland, and I have to take evasive action.

Only difference is that most people who do it are more lucky and their irresponsible behaviour doesn't cause accidents as either there is no other traffic, or other traffic is going slow enough to react.

My point is that what this guy did was wrong, but not unusual at all. It happens all the time, just mostly without such sewere consequences - but not because it's less dangeous, but because of pure luck.

Special Circumstances

CiniO wrote: »

all that happened was that he actually did turn right without checking for oncoming traffic..

I kinda know what I'm getting myself into here, sigh, and sometimes I even agree with your arguments...

...but the landrover aggressively passed a white car on the left, THEN swung across that car AND the path of the oncoming car.

That is not just idle passive stupidity (granted, plenty of that on display on the roads every day of the week), that is out and out deliberate, calculated, agrressive @ssholing.

edited

OldMrBrennan83

This post has been deleted.