Not in Texas

The Core RPGC Main Forum
21

Okay Bing, you’re just being ridiculous. You’re assuming ideal conditions. We don’t know that the road was straight and flat, allowing the victim to see a significant distance in the necessary direction, and we don’t know how fast the car was going.

First, let’s assume the car was going 45 miles per hour because that’s the minimum you proposed that someone should be able to notice as speeding. Let’s assume that a person can move at about 20 feet per second (about 14 mph since we’ll assume they run to get out of the way). Let’s say the car is headed straight at them now, two seconds would get them 40 feet away, and that sounds like a safe distance, right?

In that two seconds, the car will have traveled 132 feet. The driver hasn’t slowed at all because if the moron doesn’t notice a body sticking through his windshield, he’s not much more likely to notice one in front of him in the middle of the road.

So you’d be able to easily notice a speeding car headed for you at 130 feet, right? But wait, it takes time for the brain to realize that there is a car about to turn you into road pizza. Under ideal circumstances, a person can begin to react in about a half a second. Of course, most people would assume that they’re not about to be run over by a speeding vehicle and tend to be surprised when an event of this nature occurs, therefore the reaction time is not so quick. One second is average time for a the brain to recognize a surprise like this. This is assuming that the pedestrian for some reason turns to face the speeding vehicle so that they see it from some distance away; if they happen to notice it out of the corner of their eye, chances are the car is practically on top of them anyway and wouldn’t be able to avoid it if it were going only 10 miles an hour (I would know).

Anyway, so one second to realize what’s happening, two seconds to get out of the way, and 66 feet per second, the person would need to notice the car at about 200 feet away. Still easy enough, right?

Of course, the driver’s drunk and swerving, how could you not see him? Oh, wait, he’s swerving, which way should you go? It takes time to decide which direction is safer, and each second spent wondering is another 66 feet closer to being hit. And while the driver continues to swerve, you second guess your move and it takes that much longer to get out of the way.

Of course, if the drunk is really trucking it at 70 mph, that’s 100 feet per second. How observant are you? Do you constantly look back and forth while crossing the street? Would you be certain that you would notice a car a quarter mile away racing down the road and know that you might not get across the street before it made it to where you stood?

You can’t blame pedestrians for being hit be a car. I know a girl who was crossing the street one evening less than a mile from her home. The intersection is right about at the top of a hill. She didn’t even see the car coming before it hit her.

Pretty dumb, my ass.

22

demi, WTF?! I just said I didn’t blame the pedestrian!

Secondly, you’re assuming worst conditions. I’m not looking to make this into a physics problem. If the car was going 70, you’re going to notice it a damn lot more.

Also, where are you assuming the person is standing when they notice the car? If it’s the side of the road then you just added a LOT of time to his clock. You seem to be thinking he’s walking down the middle of the road.

You got hit by a car too? And a girl you know? I said I would try not to draw up on personal experiance in a prior post, but I have been in a situation like this and got out of the way (I cleared the gaurd rail and ran into some woods just before the car hit the part of the rail I jumped).

I want to add a few additional comments:

  1. I don’t really want answers to my questions in this or any other post here.
  2. I was so pissed after reading the article I posted my response misunderstanding that the pedestrian was drinking too, and thus I blamed him for drinking (I think drinking is just stupid in general, but that’s another topic, and one I won’t argue, so don’t put me up to it).
  3. Even though I misread it I still stand by my statement: I lived it, I know it’s possible, even on a twisted road.
  4. Lastly, I pointed out that I’d like to see this arguement die. Please let it, it’s not going to come to any other conclusion anyway. Pointing out what you think is wrong about my logic isn’t going to make me agree, it’s just going to annoy me and make me think less of you.

Now please, just ignore my posts here if you don’t like them.

23

If you wanted to see the argument die, you’d shut up instead of trying to get the last word.

24
  1. This has absolutely nothing to do with Americans.
    2: One person does not prove that a region is full of idiots.
  2. The man was drunk, not neccesarily stupid.
  3. Shut up.
25

I’d prefer justify my reasoning. I don’t put up with “you idiot” when someone acts like I said the opposite (or a very changed version) of what I did.

But don’t worry, it’ll probably die on it’s own, after all when one side of the argument dissapears it’s hard to hold up. Don’t ask.

26

My god, will BOTH of you just SHUT UP!

27

One reason why one should have a designated driver nod nod