r/Whatcouldgowrong 11d ago Facepalm 1

walking in front of a car on snowy roads

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

60.8k Upvotes

6

u/Iccyblu3 20h ago

You can see him waiting then backs up and the starts walking, look’s intentional.

2

u/Peach_Proof 22h ago

Dude! I have right of wa…..

3

u/Past_Passenger_4381 1d ago

Man his legs left on his own.

5

u/Suitable_Emergency84 2d ago

He definitely said “Ayy I’m walkin here”

6

u/kingkalm 3d ago

I love this episode of black mirror.

7

u/jool 4d ago

That was a dumb decision the drunk guy but the car was also driving too fast for the weather, tire, and type of road combination. So dumbness displayed by all involved.

2

u/CarsonLikesStocks 1d ago

In these type of conditions is doesn't matter how fast you're going, if you slam on the breaks you will slide. Most people's reactionary response is to slam on the breaks

-1

u/jool 23h ago

Sorry but we just seem to have a difference of priorities in our minds and physics definitely disagree with you. If it requires walking pace to be in control then that is what is required. This view may be colored by being in a country where pedestrians have priority on all crossings that does not have traffic lights or just not wanting to hit people with a car. I just wonder if you'd say the same thing about driving on a road along a cliff or something like that where you're the one in danger instead.

1

u/CarsonLikesStocks 21h ago

Do you drive in the snow 4 months a year?

-1

u/jool 21h ago

I'm a Swede. I'm guessing the difference is that we require people to have winter tires in the winter and also at least try to teach people how the winter can change how the car behaves?

5

u/CarsonLikesStocks 21h ago

Yeah I'm from canada. It's fair that people should be driving at a pace where they should have control. But my statement still stands, it's reactionary for people to slam on the breaks, and if you slam on the breaks you will slide. Especially when it's stupid cold outside.

1

u/TrueTP 1d ago

It seems you either don’t drive cars or drive something akin to a smart. Or maybe you just don’t know how fresh snow works with tires. That car is already going way fuckin slower that I ever would when it’s a notmal snowy day. Fresh thicc snow though? You probably never did a 360 down a mountain with a bus full of people and then squashed a smart between yourself and an Suv (we were right in front of the hospital, like right before the steps). Funny story, anyways, that bus driver learned a lesson that day. I mean we slid for about 8 meters past each bus stop, when we were just going from village to village. Shoulda noticed that that was a bad idea.

If you’ve never driven under circumstances like these, then stop blaming someone driving an E-Sports limousine. Make that your point. Ugh. He is driving a Tesla. Something you could in theory back up.

But stop blaming people that drive cars for every god damn thing stupid people do.

1

u/jool 1d ago

Grew up in northern Sweden. Where bus drivers drift around roundabouts and can still come to a stop where the stops are. I think they might be able to do this by being aware of the surface and the capabilities of their vehicle. People loose control of their vehicles here too of course but then it is usually seen as their fault except for rare and unpredictable situations. Having a heavy car or the wrong tires on it is not unpredictable and adapting your speed to it is expected.

18

u/Darth-Flan 5d ago

Bruh didn’t even loose his ciggy!

23

u/jxher123 5d ago

Insurance scam. He walked out with his arms up ready.

38

u/dc_scorpio 6d ago

don't drink and walk.

39

u/Lebron_chime 7d ago

The way he raised his arms before he was on the road

67

u/thesmellofasneeze 7d ago

he scamming you my boy

44

u/SilasT08 8d ago

Dash cam?

22

u/Antigon0000 7d ago

Dat scam

16

u/solzhen 7d ago

See all the angles and the radar sub-windows? It’s a Tesla.

50

u/SuddenMcLovin 8d ago

If you watch closely it seems like he was thinking about running and stopped. I'm not implying it was intentional but if he would have took off immediately he might not have been hit.

Either way he seems fine and it's a story he will tell for the rest of his life with video to back it up

14

u/biosphere10 7d ago

I dunno, insurance fraudsters usually wanna make it look bad. This dude still has a cigarette in his mouth!

21

u/-Wofster 8d ago

He looks very drunk

9

u/prinklesnout 7d ago

Yup, drunks are rarely hurt in the moment. He will likely feel that one the next morning

1

u/Otherwise_Hat7713 3d ago

That, or die in his sleep due to internal bleeding.

11

u/Hot_West8057 7d ago

He is. This is what's known as The Hill in Boulder, Colprado. So add in legal mushrooms and/or marijuanas.

84

u/bluntmasterkyle 8d ago

Insurance fraud attempt

31

u/-Wofster 8d ago

Nah dude just looks drunk

8

u/No-Werewolf3603 8d ago

Exactly ! I agree with you

7

u/vivalavega27 8d ago

Indeed it was

10

u/DungeonsandDevils 8d ago

Straight up, looked like he went back to the curb and waited a second just to get the timing right 😂

30

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

19

u/FMDnative480 8d ago

Meh…. Shouldn’t trigger you that much to want to kill someone. “Oh man look at that smoker. Let’s go fucking kill him” you sound fun

-4

u/CantaloupeHour5973 9d ago

That's pretty rude. What if you replaced smoker with any other hot topic noun? yikes! Tough look

-5

u/BiscuitNIWASHI 8d ago

I mean if you really wanna say that being gay is the same as destroying your lungs willingly then sure

3

u/CantaloupeHour5973 8d ago

Why does it matter? In either case you’re still arbitrarily victimizing a demographic for no reason

-7

u/BiscuitNIWASHI 8d ago

The difference is smokers harm themselves and others, second hand smoking, most other demographics don’t.

1

u/prinklesnout 7d ago

Smug is the leading cause of harm to others, should it be acceptable to run you down with a car?

2

u/ShakeandBaked161 3d ago

It's not smog it's smug! And it's heading right for George clooneys acceptance speech!

5

u/CantaloupeHour5973 8d ago

So if someone is harming themselves, e.g someone who does self harm, you suggest just killing them extrajudicially with a car? Waterproof logic

-5

u/BiscuitNIWASHI 8d ago

Holy shit did you miss the “and others” part? Do you read selectively? Smokers actively harm others, have you ever heard of second hand smoking?

5

u/CantaloupeHour5973 8d ago

It’s not 1965 anymore. No one is smoking indoors anymore. No one is smoking in cars or hospitals or malls. Cigarettes are being phased out. They’re being recognized for the evil that they are. Anyone you see smoking now is doing so outdoors. Second hand smoke is probably responsible for an infinitesimally small number of afflictions in 2022. Smoking is hard enough to justify to yourself when you are a smoker (I’m not), but it is a physical addiction and smokers don’t need a bunch of shithead kids on the internet to remind them how disgusting they are, they are well aware

3

u/Jackiedhmc 8d ago

Ffs. Virtue signaling.

7

u/Manchild43000001 9d ago

Reddit moment

13

u/ProfessorIsaiah 9d ago

I don’t really think that warrants death lmao, I doubt the guy’s any happier than you are that he’s smoking

94

u/Affectionate-Ad6292 9d ago

I thought it was a game lol

-4

u/Blackadder1738 9d ago

God has a special providence for fools and for drunkards.

7

u/Jman9999999999 9d ago

Water to wine.

84

u/idonthaveusername9 9d ago

Did anyone wake see the guy fall in the background🤔😂

17

u/SuckmyBlunt545 9d ago

I think everyone’s plastered

27

u/B00KW0RM214 9d ago

Not just once, but twice. Bless his heart.

42

u/wyattbutler 9d ago

Literally looks like GTA.

13

u/Kloenkies 9d ago

Gta 6 gameplay?! s/

49

u/squirrel_anashangaa 9d ago

It pays to have a dash cam

-3

u/Dracogame 7d ago

It pays to have proper tires. This is the driver’s fault 100%.

1

u/jasonheartsreddit 4d ago

Driver didn't even brake when the ped was clearly at the crossing. 100% negligent. All tesla drivers are fucking tools.

14

u/notsocrazycatlady69 9d ago

He has all four sides cameras 🧐

13

u/nickn54 9d ago

Possibly a Tesla or a car with advanced “self” driving capability

37

u/7fingered-meatcutter 9d ago

IDIOCRACY NOW!!!

82

u/idkhowbtfmbttf 9d ago

That fucker is drunk.

51

u/sam857us 9d ago

Drunk idiot! I hope he didn’t damage your car.😉

38

u/Cuteypup1000 9d ago

I want a car with all those blindside cameras

2

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[deleted]

11

u/Cuteypup1000 9d ago

U think I can afford a tesla?

5

u/Zyncon 9d ago

Just randomly hopping in to say that they recently lowered the cost and that the used market is, thankfully, crashing. You can pick up a used Model 3 for mid to upper 20’s now if you watch the market. (Still expensive but way cheaper than it used to be).

-3

u/[deleted] 9d ago

[deleted]

15

u/-Canonical- 9d ago

Imagine simping this fucking hard for a shitty car company.

12

u/Healthy-Cupcake2429 9d ago

And loans are at their highest interest rate in a decade. Without a decent credit score it's significantly worse and ultimately, gotta earn enough to pay it.

17

u/Cuteypup1000 9d ago

Sir I'm a broke college child living at home

28

u/kubesteak 9d ago

Is it bad that I watched this a few more times for fun? 😆

3

u/Human_Statement73 8d ago

I think that is expected. This is definitely a video you want to watch on repeat.🤣

34

u/_Chocolate_Starfish 9d ago

"He has to stop, it's the law, pedestrian right of way" 🤣

0

u/Dracogame 7d ago

It is, the driver is now liable for all damages. Drive safely.

2

u/_Chocolate_Starfish 7d ago

If you're dumb enough to step out in front of a vehicle on an ice covered road you deserve every bit of what's coming to you. Sad that you see this as the drivers fault.

1

u/Dracogame 7d ago

The law sees it as the drivers fault. If you can’t drive safely, you can’t drive at all.

The expectation that everyone arounds you has to adapt to your dangerous behavior because your ass is too lazy to walk is stupid as fuck.

3

u/wakeupthebuddha 7d ago

Dude this guy straight up walked in front of this persons car how were they supposed to stop

1

u/Dracogame 7d ago

The driver had all the time in the world to stop. In fact, you can see from his rear camera when he slams on the brakes. But he is clearly driving with wrong tires, the car slides on the road and hit the guy.

It’s the driver’s fault. If your car takes 7 seconds to stop from that speed (or in general if your car takes 7 seconds to stop while within a city), then you shouldn’t drive.

2

u/wakeupthebuddha 7d ago

The driver could not stop. Have u ever driven on slick roads

Edit to add: not only the above, but you can see the pedestrian start to walk step back then wait for the car and then walked out right in front of it. In what scenario is a driver liable for someone who steps out in front of their car at a low speed on icy roads. There was not enough time for the driver to stop that’s pretty clear

1

u/Dracogame 7d ago

The driver is still responsible. You need to have the proper equipment and make sure you can stop if the road is slick, or not drive at all.

It’s really that easy.

1

u/wakeupthebuddha 6d ago

So anyone who has had a deer run out in front of them and didn’t have time to react is liable? This person walked right on out in front of a moving car with no available reaction time.

Edit to add: how about we experiment and I stand a few feet away from you and throw something at your face, if you don’t catch it then it’s your fault and you should have the proper reflexes or not be exposing ur face to shit

2

u/Dracogame 6d ago

No time to react? Are you sure we are watching the same video?

The driver is hitting the brakes for 7 full seconds before the car stops. You can see that from the brake lights on the rear camera.

This has nothing to do with reaction time. The car should be fitter with proper tires or chains, or not be moving at all.

Also, if a pedestrian is moving erratically, you take the safe bet and stop regardless.

15

u/FloridaGirlNikki 9d ago

Anyone know what kind of car/dash cam set up this is with all the different angles?

6

u/5tupid5exyFlanders 9d ago

Might just be OEM Tesla or other EV?

6

u/Zyncon 9d ago

It’s Tesla.

21

u/slggg 9d ago

What a vibrant street ruined by cars

23

u/rustymcknight 9d ago

God forbid somebody from outside the city needs to enter your city to do business.

-20

u/slggg 9d ago

Its called public transit

4

u/depressed_leaf 8d ago

That would work if public transit wasn't shit in the US aside from a select few places.

2

u/rustymcknight 8d ago

And how about those of us in rural communities 35 miles outside of the city? Don’t see many busses and trains on the farm. But hey, you city people make the rules. We just keep you fed and housed, for now.

4

u/Onlyhereformyproject 9d ago

Yknow it'd be more convenient to just have your own transportation

37

u/OcelotNamedBaboo 9d ago

Sorry but I'd have got out and knocked him the hell out for that stupidity.

2

u/Human_Statement73 8d ago

Then he could DEFINITELY sue you. Good move.

2

u/OcelotNamedBaboo 8d ago

Typical American comment.

We don't sue people in my country, the world isn't just the US.

1

u/Human_Statement73 5d ago

You're being presumptuous. I didn't say I would sue anyone. I've had plenty of VALID reasons to sue several people and never have.

27

u/ki-sop 9d ago

You can see the bollards where the pavement extends out on either side of the road, ground markings if there are are under the snow.

103

u/Prior-Ad-7329 9d ago

Intentional for sure. He knew they were going slow enough that he probably wouldn’t get seriously hurt but could still try to sue them. But then there was a dashcam lol.

45

u/MadMaui 9d ago

Why post a video recording of a video, instead of the actual video?

2

u/Human_Statement73 8d ago

He said it was a rental and he didn't have access to it.

3

u/Chaltione 9d ago

Let's @ Elon on Twitter and ask for a feature to upload dashcam directly to /r/IdiotsInCars

9

u/Waffleshot 9d ago

Depending on how and where the video is stored they might not be able to easily get a copy of it. I've had it happen at places I worked, where it was simply easier/faster for the police to record the screen for CCTV than to wait for someone to send a file to the station.

6

u/Zyncon 9d ago

For Teslas you yank the USB out the glove box or center console and put it in your computer. The way it’s formatted in folders, each camera is separate video files and they’re all named awfully. Without a program that sorts it all it is far easier to just record the screen.

1

u/Human_Statement73 8d ago

It was a rental.

2

u/Zyncon 8d ago

Oh well that makes it even harder lol. Yeah recording is totally valid then.

-1

u/VxJasonxV 9d ago

What? You think they have Reddit on computers now? Reddit’s already in my hand, so I need to use it that way!

-70

u/Hot_Comparison_945 9d ago

Far-left reddit: It’s the car’s fault!

17

u/ronm4c 9d ago

Don’t you have a trucker convoy to organize or something

31

u/iamnovis 9d ago

Why did politics come into the equation?

62

u/ReanimatedStalin 9d ago

Far-right Reddit: who can I invent in my mind?

-29

u/Hot_Comparison_945 9d ago

Our number of upvotes confirms this is actually a very far-left platform. There’s no “far-right Reddit”. Thank you for your contribution in determining that.

14

u/gr8ful_cube 9d ago

The number of downvotes and upvotes confirms you're a moron, no more

11

u/ReanimatedStalin 9d ago

This take that you are presenting shows the incredible lack of depth of analysis you and presumably other dumb Western right wingers are willing to carry out on a given topic. I hope one day you gain some curiosity and start educating yourself. It also might help to talk to real people in the real world.

-2

u/siliconbased9 9d ago

I mean bro.. those are real people in the real world. Leftists and alt right dipshits are the real people. Bill and Hillary neolibs and Obama dorks that love a good Tom cruise flick and don’t want Guantanamo closed necessarily, just toned down a bit, and would rather be mad at arby’s than stop cops from killing Ahmad arberys.. now we’re talking Hunger Games citizens of the Capitol levels of intellectual dissonance. And those are the people that will be shedding each other’s blood in the streets because globalist pricks on both “sides of the aisle” (so dumb) just had to keep getting their clits pummeled by the hot tub jets of Laissez-faire capitalism for thirty more seconds. So sick of political other siding and whatabouting.. like goddamn, these idiots will think whatever they’re told to, especially if they’re being told they don’t think what other people tell them to.

3

u/ReanimatedStalin 9d ago

Except both sides are right wing and your use of pop culture references to summarize different political tendencies completely disregards people's historical and material reference points and injects your own conspiracy minded logic to reduce people into generic boxes. People are very aware of their own lives and are generally not stupid. Take your weird pseudo intellectual Alex Jones shit somewhere else.

59

u/CharizardLeo 9d ago

That looked like Jeremy Renner with a cigarette.

10

u/Lilmaggot 9d ago

Oh lawd, you made me think of his snowcat accident.

7

u/CharizardLeo 9d ago

You and me both. When I saw the snow and the guy's face, I immediately thought of Renner.

47

u/ToonAnt 9d ago

An unstoppable force vs the unmovable cigarette. Almost destroyed reality.

37

u/kjk050798 9d ago

This video has so many layers to it.

83

u/Educational_Cattle10 9d ago

Does anyone else notice the couple in the background running towards the accident and the guy slips and falls in the snow and just lays there LOL and then the woman doesn't even notice and keep running lololol

10

u/paxone 9d ago

Hahaha mate was struggling to even get up before the accident!! Didn't notice till I read you comment but glad I rewatched and got a good laugh outta that

19

u/TedwardDanson 9d ago

Just Tom Hardy researching a role.

8

u/psychedstoner420 9d ago

I thought it was Jason Bateman at first

18

u/CaptainFizgig 9d ago

At least he still had his cigarette…

23

u/bourne23k 9d ago

What a beautiful city tho

15

u/KrabQuakes 9d ago

Boulder CO

6

u/Piano_ManT 9d ago

Oh yeah! Right in front of Fox Theatre!

54

u/Anonynominous 9d ago

That's so dumb. He steps forward then steps back, then decides to step forward again and into oncoming traffic. How much you wanna bet he was drunk?

3

u/Sumwan_In_Particular 9d ago

Does it look staged to anyone else?

9

u/Piano_ManT 9d ago

In Boulder? Definitely

6

u/Subjective-Suspect 9d ago

Super wasted

21

u/giant_lebowski 9d ago

or scamming

3

u/Anonynominous 9d ago

That thought definitely crossed my mind

1

u/giant_lebowski 9d ago

Hopefully the thought crossed better than he did

40

u/Dogzilla66 10d ago

Least he held on to his smoke

58

u/Practical-Ordinary-6 10d ago edited 10d ago

Here's what I learned a long time ago. When two people are crossing a road and one goes and one hesitates, the odds are substantial that the second person will change their mind about the hesitation, and decide to go - even though they now have even less time than they had when they first hesitated. Something primal about remaining together jumps into the driver's seat in their mind and common sense jumps into the backseat. [See what I did there?]

I knew a girl who was killed this way, darting out to follow her mother at the last second. I always assume, especially the younger they are, that the second person will do that. It doesn't always happen, but it's likely enough that I don't take the chance. If one goes, I let the other go, even if I have to come to a stop. Right-of-way doesn't really matter.

14

u/Carpe_deis 10d ago

generally speaking, from a legal standpoint in most jurisdictions, a pedestrian ALWAYS has right of way, and a car is ALWAYS required to yield.

12

u/requiemofchaos 9d ago

From a realistic standpoint, the multi-ton vehicle has the right of way every single time, because physics doesn't give a remote shit about local jurisdiction and there are too many drivers who genuinely would not care if they run you down.

1

u/jasonheartsreddit 4d ago

too many drivers who genuinely would not care if they run you down

oh look, you found the problem

8

u/thenewaddition 9d ago

This is how pedestrians should think. The problem is this is how drivers think.

3

u/Yithar 9d ago

Yeah, I detail an incident here where I had legal right of way as a cyclist. I think the driver thought they could beat me and didn't realize I was riding an e-bike.

7

u/Carpe_deis 9d ago

yeah you don't seem to know what "right of way" means. Same thing is true about a runaway train, car with broken brakes, entering an active intersection. They don't have the right of way. You absolutely should not get in the way though.

8

u/wagonkid 9d ago

That’s why he specified the realistic standpoint. Graveyards are full of people who had legal right of way.

2

u/Carpe_deis 9d ago

But thats not what "right of way" means. I get your point. If you have legal right of way and a car enters the intersection running a red, you should brake for them. for sure. But its a legal construct.

3

u/wagonkid 9d ago

Right. Which we all agree on. I think he was just highlighting that realistic and legal are not always one in the same. Hence the emphasis. ?????

0

u/Carpe_deis 9d ago

I agree. However, "right of way" means something specific.

2

u/wagonkid 9d ago

Yes, the op was using a common phrase because it fits. Facetiously, a 10 ton freight truck always has the “right of way” - even if that’s not technically the American legal definition of right of way in this instance. Words that are used in legal definitions are not bound to ONLY being legal definitions!!!

7

u/6percentdoug 9d ago

yeah you're def. wrong on this. lots of lots contradictions to that rule. Also - just as a lawyer, he stepped out in a blizzard less than 10 feet in front of a moving vehicle. There would absolutely be no chance this man could sue the driver for anything here (with the video evidence).

0

u/Addicted2Qtips 9d ago

He could definitely sue. Would he win? Likely not. Would insurance company eventually settle to make him go away? Maybe.

2

u/dimitri121 9d ago

Absolute reddit moment trying to 1 up with the "Well akshually 🤓☝ he could sue them"

2

u/Addicted2Qtips 9d ago

Why? He absolutely could sue him. You can sue anyone for just about anything in this country. Happens all the time.

2

u/dimitri121 9d ago

The comment you replied to specified that he would not be able to sue the driver

FOR ANYTHING.

Not that the lawsuit was impossible, but that gaining anything from it would be.

YOU ACKNOWLEDGE THIS IN INITIAL YOUR COMMENT.

And yet you still thought you were doing something.

1

u/Addicted2Qtips 9d ago

He could absolutely sue and get a settlement from the insurance company. This is wrong, which was the point of my reply.

I’m not going to continue to debate this with you because you seem a little special, but people sue for all kinds of stupid shit, and often get paid to go away because the cost of dealing with it is too annoying.

Where I’m from people literally slip on sidewalks in the snow and sue over it, and get paid out. There are thousands of these lawsuits every year in my city.

There are personal injury lawyers who specialize in this, they’re often referred to as “ambulance chasers.” Google “slip and fall lawyer.”

So yes, he can sue. And yes, he could get paid out.

2

u/6percentdoug 9d ago

I worked at an insurance company AS A LAWYER.

Do you think they settle every single case no matter what as long as the damages are below a threshold or something?

We investigate! Lol this piece of evidence means the plaintiff would get a summary judgment with prejudice and likely have to pay for the insurance company attorney fees.

Are you an actual lawyer? If not, don't make stuff up. If you are, holy shit are you a walking liability to your clients.

2

u/Addicted2Qtips 8d ago

The person could absolutely sue, and depending on a number of factors, could end up with a settlement.

In my original comment that the rude commenter above commented on, I said it wasn’t likely. But certainly possible.

People have sued and gotten settlements for all kinds of stupid shit.

-2

u/Pro_Moriarty 9d ago

Given the conditions and clear line of sight the motorist would be expected to adjust their driving based on the potential hazards ahead, such as slowing down, that should pedestrian enter road increases chance to stop in time

2

u/Human_Statement73 8d ago

Given the conditions??? Did you look at the road? Did you see the people in the background that could not stand up or walk??

2

u/Pro_Moriarty 7d ago

Precisely, snowy (and icy) as fck. Therefore stopping distances will be severly impacted. The visibility appears very clear, and the risk is also abundently clear.

Do i blame the driver? No. But i'm not the letter of the law. Did the driver take all reasonable precautions to reduce the risk, I don't know, but some lawyer would have a field day arguing not.

→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies
→ More replies