WaterfowlForum.Net

Just got back from a daddy 911 call.
They got in a wreck. I responded quickly. Accident was seven tenths of a mile away.
When I arrived and surveyed the damages...couldnt figure it out. The 5-0 guy was scratching his head inside his vehicle. Its raining. So I asked my daughter what happened.
She says, "we turned into a clear lane on a four lane street. The guy changed lanes and hit us in the side as we were turning. I said you are in the clear. Went and told officer it is a violation to change lanes at an intersection and this is why.

He said thanks and shook my hand. Young guy.
I am just glad nobody got hurt.
The other driver looked awefully nervous. Probly uninsured. Will see....

Here is what happened. She didnt tell me this til later.

Now, who is at fault? Both ppl made decisions simultaneously that were bad. Hard to say. I know who got ticketed for what. Crazy!

#1 totally at fault

DeadEye_Dan wrote:#1 totally at fault

This is right.

My only accident was a very similar situation...
Dumb lady signaled...
I went to pull out (this is my established pattern )
She decided not to continue on her original course and slammed right in to me
Needless to say the Kids in the back almost....

Same situation...except #1 is a police cruiser. Now who gets ticketed for what? On a two lane road this would be more obvious. Its also a reason you dont weave through traffic.
The four lane in this incident is very busy as you have to take the initiative or sit there all day.
Waiting for all four lanes to be clear is hard at 7am and impossible at the time the accident happened.
Tough call but there was an illegal lane change involved.

Could use some front end work. Nice to know about this so I can hunt down a sucker.
Hehe.

Ever been where youhad to move so someone could turn into the same street or alley? The whole world stops for a minute. I kinda think thats what happened and#3 got impatient. Fucker jacked his truck all up too.
My kids just got the side smashed a little.

aunt betty wrote:Same situation...except #1 is a police cruiser. Now who gets ticketed for what? On a two lane road this would be more obvious. Its also a reason you dont weave through traffic.
The four lane in this incident is very busy as you have to take the initiative or sit there all day.
Waiting for all four lanes to be clear is hard at 7am and impossible at the time the accident happened.
Tough call but there was an illegal lane change involved.

Well that changes things... does a DNR officer write himself a ticket for accidentally shooting three Mallard Hens?

#1 still at fault.

Yep.

#1 fucked up. Illegal left hand turn - failed to yield right-of-way.

Illegal lane changes within an intersection in CA is an urban myth and I'm inclined to say it is in AR as well as I can't find anywhere in your vehicle code that states otherwise.

Section 27-51-302 of Title 27 of your VC says:

Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two (2) or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this subchapter shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until the driver has first ascertained that movement can be made with safety;

(2) Official signs may be erected directing slower- moving traffic to use a designated lane or allocating specified lanes to traffic moving in the same direc- tion, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such sign.

#1's at fault for driving in violation of
27-51-501(a) or 27-51-502. Not sure which is more applicable. Maybe some Arksnsas super trooper can shed some light on it for ya

Redbeard wrote:Illegal lane changes within an intersection in CA is an urban myth and I'm inclined to say it is in AR as well as I can't find anywhere in your vehicle code that states otherwise.

Section 27-51-302 of Title 27 of your VC says:

Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two (2) or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this subchapter shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until the driver has first ascertained that movement can be made with safety;

(2) Official signs may be erected directing slower- moving traffic to use a designated lane or allocating specified lanes to traffic moving in the same direc- tion, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such sign.

#1's at fault for driving in violation of
27-51-501(a) or 27-51-502. Not sure which is more applicable. Maybe some Arksnsas super trooper can shed some light on it for ya

Son of a bitch! Are you Andy or Barney?

I guess it is your job to know how things work. Sounds like you got it all figured out!

Normally I just close my eyes and hit the gas, hope for the best.

Tomkat wrote:

Redbeard wrote:Illegal lane changes within an intersection in CA is an urban myth and I'm inclined to say it is in AR as well as I can't find anywhere in your vehicle code that states otherwise.

Section 27-51-302 of Title 27 of your VC says:

Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two (2) or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this subchapter shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until the driver has first ascertained that movement can be made with safety;

(2) Official signs may be erected directing slower- moving traffic to use a designated lane or allocating specified lanes to traffic moving in the same direc- tion, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such sign.

#1's at fault for driving in violation of
27-51-501(a) or 27-51-502. Not sure which is more applicable. Maybe some Arksnsas super trooper can shed some light on it for ya

Son of a bitch! Are you Andy or Barney?

I guess it is your job to know how things work. Sounds like you got it all figured out!

Normally I just close my eyes and hit the gas, hope for the best.

Barney

Redbeard wrote:

Tomkat wrote:

Redbeard wrote:Illegal lane changes within an intersection in CA is an urban myth and I'm inclined to say it is in AR as well as I can't find anywhere in your vehicle code that states otherwise.

Section 27-51-302 of Title 27 of your VC says:

Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two (2) or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this subchapter shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until the driver has first ascertained that movement can be made with safety;

(2) Official signs may be erected directing slower- moving traffic to use a designated lane or allocating specified lanes to traffic moving in the same direc- tion, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such sign.

#1's at fault for driving in violation of
27-51-501(a) or 27-51-502. Not sure which is more applicable. Maybe some Arksnsas super trooper can shed some light on it for ya

Son of a bitch! Are you Andy or Barney?

I guess it is your job to know how things work. Sounds like you got it all figured out!

Normally I just close my eyes and hit the gas, hope for the best.

Barney

Respect

If you are Barney, I am going to declare Tiller or Boot as Andy...which one is Andy Red?

Both drivers were issued citations.
Both were at fault. Will let you know how the insurance claims go.
Side note.
#3 was driving a borrowed vehicle.
Does not affect the outcome other than his buddy wont be lending that truck to anyone again.
Totalled.
#1 drove home.
96 dodge ram t-boned 06 ford. Ford won this one.

Redbeard wrote:Illegal lane changes within an intersection in CA is an urban myth and I'm inclined to say it is in AR as well as I can't find anywhere in your vehicle code that states otherwise.

Section 27-51-302 of Title 27 of your VC says:

Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two (2) or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this subchapter shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until the driver has first ascertained that movement can be made with safety;

(2) Official signs may be erected directing slower- moving traffic to use a designated lane or allocating specified lanes to traffic moving in the same direc- tion, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such sign.

#1's at fault for driving in violation of
27-51-501(a) or 27-51-502. Not sure which is more applicable. Maybe some Arksnsas super trooper can shed some light on it for ya

Try Illinois law. If you can. This is interesting. IMO it should be. It is illegal to pass at intersections on twolane highways. Right?

No. It's not.

It's illegal to pass on a double yellow, or if oncoming traffic is present.

Only if there is a cop within sight or traffic camera.

I never pass in an intersection, legal or not it's stupid as hell

Great way to take a hit.

jehler wrote:I never pass in an intersection, legal or not it's stupid as hell

But do you change lanes to the left lane when the guy in front of you is slowly making a right turn?

Changing lanes without signaling

It's when a man goes from the vagina to the anus in one quick motion without warning his partner.
Example: I was changing lanes without signaling on Renee in the shower and she went deaf for a minute.

Tomkat wrote:If you are Barney, I am going to declare Tiller or Boot as Andy...which one is Andy Red?

Boot gets my vote for Andy!

Boot is Andy, and Tiller is Floyd the barber.


Sent from a fancy ass phone

I would've pegged Beef for Floyd.

aunt betty wrote:

Redbeard wrote:Illegal lane changes within an intersection in CA is an urban myth and I'm inclined to say it is in AR as well as I can't find anywhere in your vehicle code that states otherwise.

Section 27-51-302 of Title 27 of your VC says:

Driving on roadways laned for traffic. Whenever any roadway has been divided into two (2) or more clearly marked lanes for traffic, the following rules in addition to all others consistent with this subchapter shall apply:

(1) A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from the lane until the driver has first ascertained that movement can be made with safety;

(2) Official signs may be erected directing slower- moving traffic to use a designated lane or allocating specified lanes to traffic moving in the same direc- tion, and drivers of vehicles shall obey the directions of every such sign.

#1's at fault for driving in violation of
27-51-501(a) or 27-51-502. Not sure which is more applicable. Maybe some Arksnsas super trooper can shed some light on it for ya

Try Illinois law. If you can. This is interesting. IMO it should be. It is illegal to pass at intersections on twolane highways. Right?

Duh. My bad. Don't know why I was thinking you were from Arkansas.

3legged_lab wrote:

jehler wrote:I never pass in an intersection, legal or not it's stupid as hell

But do you change lanes to the left lane when the guy in front of you is slowly making a right turn?

not at an intersection, unless I'm on a rampage of course, but if he's turning into a drive or parking lot hell yeah. My old man had taught me to never pass within 200' of an intersection as there's to many ways for things to get fucked, it stuck