Do You Think I'm More To Blame For The Crash?

   You. Try 200 next time.

   Emmy, it's your fault. Inappropriate speed. If your speed has been higher than the one that will allow you to stop safely, there is an inappropriate speed. And if there is no ban on turning back, then he is entitled to one. Wherever you look at it, it's your fault. Good luck

   Are you serious about getting into an intersection with 80? It will be for your own good to have your book taken and to take the courses again. What if this one is just stuck in the middle of an intersection? Cars also go out at intersections. You have to drive so that you can react. Whether the other is guilty doesn't matter about your guilt. You have it and it's good to understand.

   Hire a lawyer. On what grounds did they plead guilty? On the main road, the U-turn is forbidden unless there is a sign, but the other I guess will say that he wanted to make a left turn and not a U-turn, and then you are really guilty, it is still a crossroads and you are not careful enough.

   If you drove 40, wouldn't you be able to stop? Think again, who is more to blame in this case?

   You wrote it very vaguely. What is this intersection where a left turn cannot be made from the far left lane? And where then to make the left (or in this case the reverse) turn - from the right lane? In principle, if there is no sign that a U-turn is prohibited, it means that it is allowed. You are to blame for me.

   You!

   It's your fault! With a limit of 40 km / h and immediately before the intersection, you blow at a speed twice the speed limit. If he had driven a 40, you could have avoided the impact or it could have been lighter. If the U-turn is not expressly prohibited by a sign, you cannot blame the other, no matter how much you want to. The first violation is speeding and complete non-compliance with the road conditions (wet asphalt) and weather conditions (rain / snow). You can always prove that you pretended to be the big opener, you drove fast and you made the man laugh. Amen from village backs like you! I hope they take your book because you are dangerous on the road!

   It's your fault, of course. You drove at an inappropriate speed. You also can't prove that he started turning anywhere once the car was upright. He can say that you caught up with him from behind and hit him as he was driving.

   Just as you didn't admit that you were speeding, so he may not have admitted that he was making a turn there and said "as I was driving at 39 km / h, he suddenly hit me in the back". And the truth is, you're both up for a fight.

   "I had an accident and they found me guilty.", "True with 80, but that's unprovable", "But I made it strong all the way to the front fender and turned 180 degrees.", "True, there is no sign". I don't have a book, but everything you wrote shows that you are very guilty.

   You are both guilty. Why, when you have no visibility and it is slippery, do you drive fast? You don't have a fast job, your life is not worth arriving 5 minutes earlier.

   The author In fact, I was the one who made the U-turn. Some time ago I wrote the topic as it is real and you made me more guilty, ie. making a U-turn, and now I'm playing the same story on behalf of the other participant and you got me out again, i.e. the driver with 80 more guilty. Conclusion - the writer of the topic is always to blame. Exactly what I suspect is being done on the site, namely to always criticize the author, but almost never to admit the mistakes of the other participant in the story. The same story is written on behalf of different people and the writer is always to blame. Here is the real story http://spodeli.net/3/story-57034.html I (the reversal) was blamed for the protocol, and I think I was fucked. I admit that I have some guilt, but he is more guilty in my opinion.

   13, Author, you are quite mean!

   Well done! I really liked how he rubbed the noses of the commenters.

   to 13 of 10: Evalarka, author! Break the system! :))) Still, you can't help but admit that there were objective answers. Mine, for example, was one of them! :)))

   I read both topics, from this one I was left with the impression that there is a road to the left from the T-junction, so he waited in the left lane and there was no way to prove whether he wanted a U-turn or a left turn, so I decided that only approaching from behind is guilty. Although I did not write my opinion. Now, however, when I read the other topic, I was left with the impression that the T-junction has a road on the right without the right of way for people moving on the main road. The reality is when you have a T-junction where according to the markings you can turn either to the right or drive to the right, your left lane is considered speed and those who skate to make a U-turn to the left it is logical to turn right first to turn on the road without priority and then enter the road with priority and turn left to get the desired return. Therefore, since you are forbidden according to the markings on the left and vice versa, it makes no sense to stop almost across the lanes, that is, you are to blame for the mistake. And as for the one who hit you from behind, he is always to blame, because everyone who drives a car is obliged to look at his road and comply with the road conditions so that if there is an obstacle in his way to be able to stop, he could still not is a car on the road and only a box or boards that fell out of a truck it would crash again. Most likely in this case the police wrote acts to both of you, the author of this topic is guilty of driving at an inappropriate speed, the author of that topic stopped in the speedway to make an illegal U-turn. And as for the one who hit you from behind, he is always to blame, because everyone who drives a car is obliged to look at his road and comply with the road conditions so that if there is an obstacle in his way to be able to stop, he could still not is a car on the road and only a box or boards that fell out of a truck it would crash again. Most likely in this case the police wrote acts to both of you, the author of this topic is guilty of driving at an inappropriate speed, the author of that topic stopped in the speedway to make an illegal U-turn. And as for the one who hit you from behind, he is always to blame, because everyone who drives a car is obliged to look at his road and comply with the road conditions so that if there is an obstacle in his way to be able to stop, he could still not is a car on the road and only a box or boards that fell out of a truck it would crash again. Most likely in this case the police wrote acts to both of you, the author of this topic is guilty of driving at an inappropriate speed, the author of that topic stopped in the speedway to make an illegal U-turn. after all, it might not be a car on the road, but only a box or planks falling out of a truck, and it would crash again. Most likely in this case the police wrote acts to both of you, the author of this topic is guilty of driving at an inappropriate speed, the author of that topic stopped in the speedway to make an illegal U-turn. after all, it might not be a car on the road, but only a box or planks falling out of a truck, and it would crash again. Most likely in this case the police wrote acts to both of you, the author of this topic is guilty of driving at an inappropriate speed, the author of that topic stopped in the speed lane to make an illegal U-turn.

   All the angry pseudo-authorities crush them well, thank you author!

   The author to 17 - and I think we are both guilty, maybe the one with 80 is a little more guilty, but they wrote an act only to me, making the U-turn. And yes, the turnoff is on the right. At the beginning of this crossroads there were many such accidents and then they thought to put a traffic light there, but later they remembered. I forgot to say that there are footpaths in this place. So a pedestrian could be my place, and then it would be scary. The most important thing is that we escaped only with material damage in this case. Otherwise, in the same place there were accidents with pedestrians and unfortunately fatal. By the way, an acquaintance had once collided on an intercity road when he was hit by a car and he was found guilty only because he was driving with 120 out of 90 allowed. he pushed her, but because he drove with more than allowed, he was guilty according to the police. In this case, I also think that due to improper speed, he should have been rubbed, but he should be healthy. He drove at least 40 above the limit, provided that on a footpath, in heavy rain and almost no visibility. But again, I admit that I am also to blame.

   In an accident with two culprits, there is no one more guilty, just as a woman cannot be a little pregnant, more pregnant, etc. Either you have guilt or you don't. And as for whether they wrote an act to the other, it shouldn't irritate you so much, the act written to you has taught you to follow the rules and this guarantees that you are more likely to avoid an accident where you will be to blame and from now on if you will be present at the place where they write an act, I hope it will not be in your name.

   That's right, but the law must still be valid for everyone.

   "I'm approaching a T-junction where I'm at an advantage. No traffic lights, no signs." Do you understand what you wrote? So you're going through an unregulated intersection, how did you think you had an advantage? Have you heard of the right-handed rule? Rejoice that you did not kill a person, tin cans are fine, but for guilt, to be guilty! How did he know he was making a U-turn, he may have come from the right, and he has an advantage.

   From your previous topic "Let me clarify, there is no traffic light, no turning sign, but there is no turning back. There is only a marking that points straight. However, there is no special extension where you can stand and wait for the rear. I stick to part of the lane. "No matter how you describe the case, you were at an unregulated intersection, there are only road markings, which do not give you any rights! You ignored the right of the right-winger and that's why you paid a fine!

   22, 23, I was on ch. road, and the other was secondary, you did not understand

   I was a little late, but I want to say - congratulations! For a long time, the site has only criticized the authors, and not for the purpose of clear assessment or help.

   By №25, the time has long come for Bulgarians to realize that they must first fix / change / themselves before they want society to change / fix / according to their demands. In fact, to tell you how and what to change in yourself, to direct your thoughts of change is in your favor. In fact, the authors of topics have been writing on the site for a long time to complain, to ask for advice on how to change the people around them, and none of them guesses that the change of the people around him depends only on the change of himself. of his thinking from the change of his reactions. I think critics help authors a lot. For example, the author of this topic has forgotten to say whether the T-junction is on the left or on the right, he himself accepts that he and his opponent are to blame, but does not realize the benefits for him and society from being fined. .

   Author, if you were on a main road, at the crossroads you would see a road sign with an advantage! You write yourself that there were no signs or traffic lights, how do you judge that you are on a main road? You seem to know the rules so well, you're still a potential killer on the road !? Obviously, this requirement for education does not work, you need to be smart!

   26, I realize the benefit, but my question was about something else. 27, are you kidding? I can tell the difference between a major road and a minor one. I'm not that simple. If you think a 4-lane boulevard is not the main one, then I don't know who is the main one? Is this your biggest question in the topic - how did I know I was on the main road? Even a 5-year-old distinguishes a main road from a small street. If you think that there are signs at every crossroads, then that's how smart you are. I don't know how he decided that I was a potential road killer and that I was simple, but you are simple in this case. The accident happened in 2004, when I was 18 and I was a driver for less than a month, do not look that the previous topic is from 2013. Since 2004 I have not had a violation. That would be because I'm a "potential killer." I'm fed up with rubbish like you who just pick on topics with their fools. " And don't talk about who's a killer and who's not, because it could happen to you. Don't think you're insured. Sometimes a moment of inattention costs you prison. So don't talk to me like a sinless judge. Fuck your joker fuck. Only rubbish on this site. And don't talk about who's a killer and who's not, because it could happen to you. Don't think you're insured. Sometimes a moment of inattention costs you prison. So don't talk to me like a sinless judge. Fuck your joker fuck. Only rubbish on this site.

   I have not read the previous topic. And although I understand why the criminal responsibility is borne by the reversing turn - I still remain of the opinion that it is actually more guilty of speeding (although it is unprovable), because he drove at an inappropriate speed on wet surfaces, given restriction and intersection. If the speed was different, the consequences would be different. But for people to be alive and healthy and for everyone to be more careful and resourceful. Number 7

   They are both for fighting and neither of them wants to write on his grave "He was more guilty!". So guilty or not, be careful what you do to them, you're lucky to be able to write now.

   Author, if the hit car was waiting for a U-turn, it means that it was moving in your direction, and was waiting in the right place and you are to blame. If the car entered from the right side road, it was waiting for a LEFT turn also in the right place, the culprit is still you - you didn't have to drive in the left lane. The hit car would be to blame if it suddenly entered the intersection, AND SHE WAITED. In this case, it does not matter which is the main road.

   well done 16, at the parent meeting I will tell your mother that you deserve to buy a lollipop :) come on now stand on one leg and start jumping in a circle, then keep repeating mine, mine, mine ... and 30 is a parrot . Author, why do you explain yourself to this cattle, I do not understand? The scoundrels who keep repeating fight this, fight that you are ku-ku. Years ago, people like you, repeating the same thing on the net, called you bots. Smaller if they do not know what a bot is to read in google. I'm a woman just to say it's important in my opinion;)

   Until now, I called you an author, but for me you are the most ordinary squirrel, as you appear on this site, but you are the same squirrel on the road, which you prove yourself, with your stupid topic! Your job is - both shitty and big !? With your №28 post, you prove that you really are a potential killer on the road, and instead of jumping like a Japanese rooster, read what is written in the traffic rules, it will be useful to you. I have not received a single penalty for 40 years of driving, and you, yesterday's driver, have already accumulated a series of penalties, I hope you do not beat anyone! Here, read this, it will be useful to you: Section XI. Passing through a crossroads Art. 47. The driver of a road vehicle approaching an intersection must move at such a speed that, if necessary, he can stop and pass the participants in the traffic, who have an advantage. Art. 48. At an intersection of equivalent roads, the driver of a road vehicle is obliged to pass the vehicles located or approaching on his right side, and the driver of a non-rail vehicle is obliged to pass the rail vehicles regardless of their location and direction. movement. Art. 49. A driver of a road vehicle, which goes out of a dirt road on a paved road, shall be obliged to pass the road vehicles and pedestrians moving on the paved road. Art. 50. (1) At a crossroads, where one of the roads is signaled as a road with priority, the drivers of road vehicles from the other roads shall be obliged to pass the road vehicles, which are moving on the road with priority. (2) When at an intersection it is indicated that the road with priority changes its direction, the drivers, who are on this road are guided by the rules of Art. 48. The same rules shall guide each other and the drivers of vehicles that are not on the road with priority. Art. 50a. (New, SG No. 51/2007) It is prohibited to enter an intersection even with a permit signal at a traffic light, if the situation at the intersection will force the driver to stop at the intersection or to impede cross traffic. Emphasize Article 50, paragraph 1, it clearly says that the main roads are MARKED with signs! You write yourself that there was no signal at that crossroads, what is the crossroads then, you answered yourself bluntly! And don't swear, because somewhere you will end up like that piss from Vratsa, who was wandering like you! The same rules apply to each other and the drivers of vehicles that are not on the road with priority. Art. 50a. (New, SG No. 51/2007) It is prohibited to enter an intersection even with a permit signal at a traffic light, if the situation at the intersection will force the driver to stop at the intersection or to impede cross traffic. Emphasize Article 50, paragraph 1, it clearly says that the main roads are MARKED with signs! You write yourself that there was no signal at that crossroads, what is the crossroads then, you answered yourself bluntly! And don't swear, because somewhere you will end up like that piss from Vratsa, who was wandering like you! The same rules apply to each other and the drivers of vehicles that are not on the road with priority. Art. 50a. (New, SG No. 51/2007) It is prohibited to enter an intersection even with a permit signal at a traffic light, if the situation at the intersection will force the driver to stop at the intersection or to impede cross traffic. Emphasize Article 50, paragraph 1, it clearly says that the main roads are MARKED with signs! You write yourself that there was no signal at that crossroads, what is the crossroads then, you answered yourself bluntly! And don't swear, because somewhere you will end up like that piss from Vratsa, who was wandering like you! if the situation at the junction will force the driver to stop at the junction or impede cross-traffic. Emphasize Article 50, paragraph 1, it clearly says that the main roads are MARKED with signs! You write yourself that there was no signal at that crossroads, what is the crossroads then, you answered yourself bluntly! And don't swear, because somewhere you will end up like that piss from Vratsa, who was wandering like you! if the situation at the junction will force the driver to stop at the junction or impede cross-traffic. Emphasize Article 50, paragraph 1, it clearly says that the main roads are MARKED with signs! You write yourself that there was no signal at that crossroads, what is the crossroads then, you answered yourself bluntly! And don't swear, because somewhere you will end up like that piss from Vratsa, who was wandering like you!

   33, I explain to you that I haven't had a violation for 15 years, and you keep telling me like a parrot that I'm a killer. Just because I've reacted emotionally because you're proZD doesn't mean I'm a killer and you have to make up your own story.

   It sounds to me like it's your fault - there doesn't have to be a permitted U-turn sign to make one from the left lane. Speeding ...