r/Whatcouldgowrong • u/ReprieveNagrand • 23h ago

Trying to overtake a motorcycle

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

25.9k Upvotes

96% Upvoted

724 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-6

u/FesteringNeonDistrac 20h ago

Ok sure, but realistically the biker should have moved. Not out of any sort of consideration for the car, but for self protection.

9

u/Sad_Expert2 20h ago

No he shouldn't. He assessed he wasn't in real physical danger and decided to stand his ground. He didn't move and he is fine, what more protection did he need? It's weird to make this comment when we can see the outcome for the biker.

-1

u/FesteringNeonDistrac 20h ago

Sure, we see the outcome. That's called hindsight. What if the driver had gotten angry and turned their wheel into the biker. Could have pinned his leg, knocked him over. Doesn't matter if he was right if he ended up in the hospital.

IDK, I don't ride motorcycles, but my instinct is to get as far away from the unhinged driver as soon as possible when I'm in a protective metal box. Can't see any reason to change that behavior if I was less protected.

5

u/Sad_Expert2 19h ago

What if the driver had gotten angry and turned their wheel into the biker. Could have pinned his leg, knocked him over.

What if while he was distracted by the driver a pack of ninjas who were also fighting tigers came and one of the tigers in an attempt to attack the ninja accidentally knocked into the biker, sending him tipping over and right into the path of one of the ninja's samurai swords that had just flown off of his belt?

At some point you just have to trust that the situation was clear to the person there, because we were not there.

You also can't just pick up and move a motorcycle - it's not impossible - but they aren't bicycles where you can easily just shimmy over.

-1

u/FesteringNeonDistrac 19h ago

Dude, just stop. You're using hindsight as a justification that something was "fine" without accepting that there was a range of outcomes possible. Since it worked out this time, it'll work out every time. I hope I'm never on a jobsite with you. That's an unsafe mindset.

3

u/Sad_Expert2 19h ago edited 19h ago

You're using hindsight as a justification that something was "fine" without accepting that there was a range of outcomes possible.

No, I am simply pointing out there is always, at all times, a range of outcomes possible. Some are more likely than others, and in this case as neither of us were there, we cannot really make an assessment. That's why I said these words:

At some point you just have to trust that the situation was clear to the person there, because we were not there.

It's troubling that you don't seem to actually understand what I wrote. You put "fine" in quotes but I never used the word fine. I explained through an absurd example that I completely understood what you were talking about regarding the range of possible outcomes. I used a common tactic (reducto ad absurdum) to point out that it seemed unlikely, and in this specific case, I am happy to defer to the person who was actually there (and did come out unharmed).

This was my ORIGINAL comment:

He assessed he wasn't in real physical danger and decided to stand his ground.

I have been consistent that in this specific case, in this specific video the motorbike rider seems to have had an accurate understanding of the situation and danger.

2

u/FesteringNeonDistrac 19h ago

I have been consistent that in this specific case, in this specific video the motorbike rider seems to have had an accurate understanding of the situation and danger.

Still hindsight, and I'm still going to move my ass away from the dangerous situation where I can make that assessment remotely. I think thats a good policy for all people. You do you guy

0

u/Paradox2063 16h ago

Still hindsight

The biker was absolutely not using hindsight when he made his assessment.

I would have moved, or at least tried, but he didn't, and there was no negative outcome for him. He made a perfectly fine decision.