Red light accident

[snopes]

Comment: is this a dummy or a real rider. i think its real. i can't get anyone here at work to agree with me.

[TuFurg]

I guess it could be one of those new dummies that moves around after getting hit by a car...

[mags]

I can't imagine how he could possibly be moving around at all after a hit like that. But, truth is stranger than fiction. Nothing about it screams faked to me.

Looks real to me. This illustrates my argument with my brother in law in the RCMP, who says traffic cameras are safer. Umm...looks to me like the car ran a red, and if a red light camera was installed, it would only show what we saw here. I wouldn't have stopped the accident in any way. Some argue that if a driver knows the city has red light cameras, they will drive more cautiously. I say shenanigans on that...besides, what about out of town drivers? They'll continue to drive as they normally do.

[callee]

Originally Posted by JD65

Looks real to me. This illustrates my argument with my brother in law in the RCMP, who says traffic cameras are safer. Umm...looks to me like the car ran a red, and if a red light camera was installed, it would only show what we saw here. I wouldn't have stopped the accident in any way. Some argue that if a driver knows the city has red light cameras, they will drive more cautiously. I say shenanigans on that...besides, what about out of town drivers? They'll continue to drive as they normally do.

I half-agree with you. I don't think the red-light cameras make it any safer, but the warning signs for them do. Whenever I see one of those signs warning me about a red-light camera at the next intersection I am totally extra paranoid about it and even stop for the yellow light just to be sure! I never bother - come to think of it - to check whether there actually are red light cameras there, the sign alone worries me enough (I can barely afford insurance as it is!) So I guess I'm saying the government should save the money it would spend on red light cameras and just put up the signs.

[Singing in the Drizzle]

Originally Posted by callee

I am totally extra paranoid about it and even stop for the yellow light just to be sure!

Aren't you suppose to stop for the yellow light, that is unless you are to close to easily (not slam on brakes) make a stop. Maybe this it the reason the driver behind me get pissed then I stop for the yellow. I doing it wrong.

The person in the video drove through the intersection only 10 seconds before the light turned green. I know 10 seconds is a long time, but maybe the driver of the car thought he had the lights timed and would pass through just as it turned green.

Anyway the video look very real. I think the guy on the bike was luck to land on top of the car. While it looked nasty it may have reduced the damage since the car will give some when hit and the road will not. The person running with the back, looks to be some sort of traffic officer since the people in the cars seam to react to him when it points. This also lead me to believe that this may have been a portable camera and traffic officer looking for people running red lights.

[Stoneage Dinosaur]

Originally Posted by JD65

Looks real to me. This illustrates my argument with my brother in law in the RCMP, who says traffic cameras are safer. Umm...looks to me like the car ran a red, and if a red light camera was installed, it would only show what we saw here. I wouldn't have stopped the accident in any way. Some argue that if a driver knows the city has red light cameras, they will drive more cautiously. I say shenanigans on that...besides, what about out of town drivers? They'll continue to drive as they normally do.

New research on red light cameras reveals that they can reduce road injury crashes by up to 30%.

Originally Posted by Stoneage Dinosaur

New research on red light cameras reveals that they can reduce road injury crashes by up to 30%.

Briefly looking at the research study, it is just that, a study of 10 other studies taken in various countries. My only problem with that is 10 studies is not a very big pool to say definitely there is a difference. It reads "up to 30%" but doesn't mention the range...is it 10 to 30%, 25 to 30%, 1 to 30%?

Mentioned in the study is support for callee's view that the cameras themselves don't necessarily reduce collisions, but the warning signs placed to warn drivers do.

The clip probably isn't a red light camera anyway, the angle is not correct, it wouldn't be able to grab license plates well. It looks more like a news crew, or other type of media, was setting up for filming or an interview, and the driver of the Subaru may have been distracted by watching that, and ran the light. The guy with the shoulder bag could be a cameraman or something like that.

[DaGuyWitBluGlasses]

Originally Posted by mags

I can't imagine how he could possibly be moving around at all after a hit like that. But, truth is stranger than fiction. Nothing about it screams faked to me.

The rider was making a left turn and wasn't going that fast: it was more than a second between his appearance on screen and the collision. I'd estimate 8m/s (20 mph 30 kph, about the same speed as falling 3m)

With the angle of the collision he wasn't hit by the car, the motorcycle struck the car and catapaulted him as it got stuck.

He could walk away once they checked his neck out.

[Amigone201]

Where's the blood?

Also, this doesn't prove it's fake, but that guy with the shoulder bag sure did come "racing to the rescue." Good to know that pokey is nearby when the chips are down!

Originally Posted by Amigone201

Where's the blood?

Also, this doesn't prove it's fake, but that guy with the shoulder bag sure did come "racing to the rescue." Good to know that pokey is nearby when the chips are down!

People don't explode into fountains of blood like they do in the movies. I sliced the heel of my hand open with an Xacto knofe, it didn't bleed for at least 30 seconds. I think me nerves and calls were in as much shock as I was.

Speaking of shock, I've seen people get hit by vehicles. Most times people, if they react at all, do react slowly, again due to shock.

[TuFurg]

Originally Posted by DaGuyWitBluGlasses

With the angle of the collision he wasn't hit by the car, the motorcycle struck the car and catapaulted him as it got stuck.

Looks to me like the rider did hit the windshield and put a decent dent in the edge of the roof right where the roof meets the windshield. Not easy to see and perhaps I'm seeing things but pause it at :50 and you can see this damage before the car hits the cement.

Originally Posted by Morrs_Raven

That man who comes jogging up to the scene looks like a police officer of some sort. I'm curious as to why he runs over to direct traffic rather than see about the injured person.

I also found that odd at first but I think his concern is getting the cars to stop so there isn't more damage. Not a bad idea;-)

what it looks liek to me is that it was dummy, and until that guy runs acrossed the frame it doesnt apear to be moving, somethgn just seems off to me. but then again i havent slept in a while

[BrianB]

In the mid 90s I saw a motorcyclist lose control of his bike as he was trying to get on the westbound San Bernardino Freeway from the Vincent Ave. onramp in West Covina. I couldn't see what caused him to lose control because there was another car between him and me. However, I did see him fly off his bike and momentarily go airborne. Several of us pulled over to see if he was OK. Fortunately, he was. In fact, although he seemed a bit disoriented he had no visible cuts or bruises. He wanted to get back on his bike and drive off but a woman convinced him to wait for help to arrive.
The reason I bring this up is that while that he was airborne he looked like a mannequin to me because he didn't appear to have any control of his arms and legs. His arms were outstretched and stayed that way until he hit the ground. (Very unlike what you see in movies and television.) So, to me the video in the OP looks convincing.
Brian