possiblynotthefbi

possiblynotthefbi t1_je3blyo wrote

Rule 1. Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law Rule 2. Yeah, probably, but please see Rule 1.

In those types of cases, it is typically made on the decision of cash amount. If a lawyer has a 20+% cut of the financial payout, it can be more profitable to the person accepting the payout than it is to go for a larger sum, but then have to pay the lawyer.

I'm sure there are other reasons on a more technical level, but I've been witness to the above situation before, and that's all it came down to in that specific scenario.

−1

possiblynotthefbi t1_ja90vwj wrote

I feel like a better context would be how this data compares to the total number of police interactions by race. I feel like we can disregard the geography for a moment and just focus on the people involved with the police, since it doesn't really matter to the population that never interacts with them.

8

possiblynotthefbi t1_ja7pap8 wrote

I drive the same around any vehicle, lawfully, and with care. It's why I've only been in one accident as a passenger, never ad a driver, and zero tickets to my name. There is no extra care required if the other vehicle is also driving lawfully and carefully.

Semi truck and trailers, I have a different view entirely. I feel that they should have complete right-of-way in almost any circumstance given that they're the largest thing on the road. I don't think they should be allowed to ignore common laws, but the frequency of videos showing dashcam footage of some yahoo swerving in front of a semi and brake checking is too damn high. Those drivers can't stop on a dime and the smaller vehicles getting rear-ended win most of the cases where a dash cam is not in use. So my stance would be to make semi drivers no-fault entirely and that'll force people to be a little less gung-ho to mess with them.

1