Accident on 235s , Walmart area

bcp

In My Opinion
Well, if all five were travelling under the limit, and too close to each other, and the first one jammed the brakes, speed was a factor. The following four did not scrub off enough speed fast enough to avoid crashing. Or the last one did not, and pushed the ones that did forward.

But, and here's the key, a factor is not a cause. The cause would be following too close and/or inattention to driving. Remove those things, and the crash would not have happened.

It's always a factor, rarely a cause. Remove a factor, it changes the crash. Remove the cause, and the crash doesn't happen.

Oh so true but, if the 4 cars following had not been moving to start with, then I suspect the would not have hit. Speed was a factor. The cause could be considered that the speed was too great for the distance following and the reflexes of the drivers.
Change any one and you might get a different outcome
reduced speed
greater follow distance
faster reflex.
(put down the phone and drive)

All can be said to be part of the cause.
 
Oh so true but, if the 4 cars following had not been moving to start with, then I suspect the would not have hit. Speed was a factor. The cause could be considered that the speed was too great for the distance following and the reflexes of the drivers.
Change any one and you might get a different outcome
reduced speed
greater follow distance
faster reflex.
(put down the phone and drive)

All can be said to be part of the cause.

I knew they must have had a cause. Kind of like a poker run, but with cops and stuff? Oh and insurance companies?
 

glhs837

Power with Control
Oh so true but, if the 4 cars following had not been moving to start with, then I suspect the would not have hit. Speed was a factor. The cause could be considered that the speed was too great for the distance following and the reflexes of the drivers.
Change any one and you might get a different outcome
reduced speed
greater follow distance
faster reflex.
(put down the phone and drive)

All can be said to be part of the cause.

I said it was a factor. Speed and following distance are supposed to be linked, so if you don't one of them properly, the other automatically plays a larger role, of course. But someone in there initiated the chain of events in which the other drivers participated, and that persons action is the cause. Take my rear end crash a few years ago. The cause was the lady in back not paying attention (might be the cellphone she immediately was worrying about, and was found by me on the drivers floorboard) and hitting the nice guy in the minivan behind me, who was pushed into me. Me being stopped was a factor, the guys minivan blocking the view of my stopped car was a factor, as was the rain. Her speed was a factor. But her lack of attention was the cause. Paying proper attention, she could have stopped in time. But she wasnt paying attention. Cause.
 

BernieP

Resident PIA
:yay: There is no such thing as an accident. The car that pulled out in front of me yesterday did it on purpose, I'm sure.

I don't know where it was, but I heard an official traffic expert type explain that they are not "accidents". Accidents are a random act of nature, collisions have a cause rooted in human behavior
 

MMDad

Lem Putt
I don't know where it was, but I heard an official traffic expert type explain that they are not "accidents". Accidents are a random act of nature, collisions have a cause rooted in human behavior

This "official" needs to buy a dictionary.

An accident is an unfortuante event resulting from carelessness or ignorance.

A collision is when two moving objects strike each other. An allision is when a moving object strikes a stationary object.

Collisions and allisions happen in nature all the time. Accidents do not.

If there is a car crash it is either accidental or intentional. If one of the drivers did not intend for the crash to happen, it is an accident.

The word accident does not mean that there was no fault and no cause.
 
Top