• RBWells@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    4 days ago

    Insurance for my ebike is $25 per year, insurance on my car is over $3,000 per year. This is honestly one area where the economics make sense, the price does reflect the decreased risk of harming others.

      • SoftestSapphic@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        Or we could have free healthcare and public transportation instead of letting profiteering corporations be the badaid for everything

        • Hagdos@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          I’m all for free healthcare and public transit, but that doesn’t remotely cover the cost of being run over by an uninsured driver.

      • Cocopanda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        Meh. Depends on the insurance. A teenager rear ended me and I was paid handsomely very quickly for my damages.

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      I think their entering the road “caused” the accident. The other driver was definitely going way too fast and their “evasive maneauver” aas whatever the fuck that was but the Jeep was fully in their lane when it all happened. Likely they thought they had time until it turned out that the other car was going mach 1, and then it instead of hoofing it out of the way they hit the brakes(it’s not a stop everything button).

      Speculation, but I’d hardly call stopping in the other car’s lane “frame perfect”.

      • hypnicjerk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        we definitely do not have enough information here to determine right of way, visibility, or culpability. pretty much the only thing we can say for certain is that the SUV driver was going way too fucking fast.

        • Ledivin@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          we definitely do not have enough information here to determine right of way, visibility, or culpability

          lolwat? Yes, the SUV driver is clearly also at fault and was going way too fast, but the accident is almost definitely caused by the jeep.

          They are either turning left or going straight, those are the only two options, and it is clearly not safe to have done so. They did not yield or stop for oncoming/cross traffic, period. Visibility is not a valid excuse, they didn’t stop until they were well within the SUV’s lane.

          • calcopiritus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            4 days ago

            The SUV was very far when the jeep entered the intersection. The SUV didn’t even appear in the video when the jeep started crossing. If that SUV weren’t speeding that much that was perfectly safe to cross. How can the jeep imagine that the SUV was going that fast? When it entered the intersection the SUV might have even been too far to see how fast it was really going.

          • hypnicjerk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 days ago
            1. nobody asked, dumbass
            2. how the hell is visibility not a valid excuse when you have no idea when the suv actually entered their field of vision. the angle gives us no info about that entire side of the street. how are they supposed to stop for a car that could easily have only come into view after they’ve entered? is there cross traffic offscreen that could have obscured their view? are there stop signs or red lights? is this even a straight road beyond the segment we can see? clearly you have all the info so please share.
            • Ledivin@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              If you can’t see safely into an intersection, you go slowly until you know it’s safe. Apparently you shouldn’t have a license.

              Doesn’t matter if there’s a stop sign or not, this type of intersection requires the SUV driver to yield, if not stop entirely.

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    4 days ago

    In the town I lived we used to know a light pole that you could give a firm kick to cut off all the exterior lighting in the area.

    Yeah the masses are different, but personal injuries can still happen.

    But I think that should be covered by regular health insurance, you shouldn’t need a traffic insurance just for bicycling.

  • mienshao@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    5 days ago

    Am I the only one who regularly can’t see posts in this instance? It says media failed to load, and I feel like that constantly happens in fuckcars.

    • ThePantser@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      5 days ago

      You are assuming what they did after the clip ends. If it was me I would GTFO away from the falling power lines and stop a block away so to not impede traffic or emergency services. The guy could have called right out of frame.

    • Death_Equity@lemmy.world
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      5 days ago

      They should have stopped because they witnessed an accident, and were probably more than somewhat at fault.

      Going to help when power lines are struck are a great way to increase casualties or create fatalities. Approaching from a safe distance and keeping them in the car is the safest thing to do until responders can get there.

    • akilou@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      You don’t know if he did a u-turn mid block and came back. He had to at least get out of the travel lane on the main road.

  • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    5 days ago

    Why is insurance not mandatory for cyclists?

    Per the PPACA, health insurance is mandatory. This just isn’t particular to cyclists because cycling isn’t materially more dangerous than any other non-vehicular mode of transportation.

    • exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      That’s insurance for oneself.

      Mandatory car insurance for drivers is liability insurance for everyone else. The driver is perfectly free not to insure their own vehicle (or their own injuries caused by their own driving).

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        The principle of health insurance is still that you are - statically - paying for someone else. It’s liability for an unexpected injury or illness that exceeds ability to pay.

        The difference between health and car insurance really boils down to the ability to total a car in a way you can’t total a human being.

        • exasperation@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          No, my point is that auto liability insurance covers the people you hurt while driving. It does not cover yourself or your own car, and it’s perfectly legal not to insure your own car against your own negligence, even when it’s required to insure everyone else’s property against your own negligence.

          The thing being insured is different, so an auto liability insurance mandate is fundamentally different from a health insurance mandate for oneself.

  • Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    Maybe not that, bit have a look at the assholes who race at ebike top speed through the pedestrian zone.

      • Ledivin@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        That’s a fucking braindead take. If someone veers into your lane, and you get in an accident because you had to swerve to avoid them or die, you’re not at fault.