Dr. Thompson I presume

RicodJour wrote:

On Nov 8, 2:10*am, Michael Press wrote:
In article ,

*MagillaGorilla wrote:
It doesn't matter what the gap was, Dr. T would have taken at least 75 feet
to stop. *In that 75 feet (1/3 of a fottball field)

So, space _and_ time are distorted in your little world. Curious.
Don't ever go on that show, Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader?

No, 30 feet.

30 mph - 44 feet/sec.
The Infiniti can brake at 1 g.
That is 30 feet to reach a full stop.

T=m.vv/2
E=m.g.s
s=vv/(2.g)
44x44/(2.32) = 11x11/4 = 121/4 ~= 30.

Reaction time is 1/3 second.
Cyclists travel 15 feet during reaction time.
Cyclists braking distance is 30 feet/0.6 = 50 feet.
Total cyclist distance to stop = 65 feet.

Extra Credit Questions
1). Assuming the above, how fast were the cyclists going when they
crashed into the back of the car?
2). Were there car skid marks from the MCF's braking?

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

R

Infiniti has ABS, so there would be no skid marks (not including the ones in Ron
Peterson's chamois as he was doing a swan dive through the rear windshield) , but
that assumes the ABS even needed to be activated, which it probably didn't.

The cyclists did not slow down when they stacked it....that's what I understand at
least.

Magilla

RicodJour wrote:

On Nov 8, 11:34*am, Anton Berlin wrote:

The cyclists weren't able to stop fast enough more than likely because
they had at least one hand off the bars *Everything else is secondary
to that.

Everything else is secondary to your assumption. Got it.

Misanthrope spouted that the guys were "chasing" the car. To what
end? To "scare" the raging dude in the ton and a half metal box with
their ten kilo bikes and tight Lycra? That's just stupid.

Why did these 2 cyclists curse at Dr. T and give him the finger? All he
did was pass them. Dude...I've been flipped off passing cyclists and you
know what I do? I wait up at the next stop sign, walk up to them and ask
them if they want to do it to my face. They never do. Pussies. Most
cyclists are pussies.






I don't understand where such thinking comes from. The riders weren't
noobs and they weren't kids. You think they'd never encountered a
hostile driver before?

The cyclists were hostile..they told him "**** you" and gave him the
finger...why did they do that?


Do you think they were riding along just
holding up their fingers at the guy like the _duration_ of the finger
would _really_ show the driver? 'course not.

Sure.



You're ignoring a salient fact - the guy who changes lane has the
responsibility to make sure their lane change is safe.

Dr. T made a successful pass and completed it. The evidence showed that.
It was the cyclists who failed to stop in time and ran into the back of his
car. If the cyclists wanted to pass a stationary vehicle, they should have
gone around the vehicle instead of trying to ride through the trunk.



The guys on
the bike could be napping, or playing patty-cakes with each other, and
it's still the passing guy's responsibility. Cutting in front of
someone and jamming on the brakes is not responsible, and the jury
confirmed that in six or seven ways.

R

Dude, if that were me on a bike I bet you I would have stopped plenty in
time. As soon as I saw the guy swerve over into the lane I would have been
braking or moving over to one side. These two cyclists were so ****ing
arrogant and jacked up they did nothing and got caught off guard. I see
it all the time on group rides. Bunch of ****ing pretenders.

Magilla

On Nov 9, 1:13*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:

How come the cyclists didn't slow down at all, according to their GPS?

Where do you come up with a nonsensical statement like that?

For one thing, I expect that the GPS would show that they came to a
very complete stop.
Other than that, all it can reasonably show is the speed they were
moving immediately before the incident. Can you point to some
description of testimony where anything different was suggested?

You obviously were not in the courtroom and it was not televised.
Pleas don't try to tell us that you know better than the jury what was
presented.

On Nov 9, 1:01*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
You guys are not holding the state to their burden of proof. *You guys are so prejudiced against Dr. T and
you can't get around the fact that the guy actually didn't want to hurt them with his car. *

Try this one:
"Yes Judge, I pointed my loaded gun at the victim and pulled the
trigger. But I only intended to teach him a lesson. I had no idea the
bullet might actually hit him or hurt him. In fact, I never hit
anybody the last few times I shot at someone. "

MG - you don't begin to grasp the nature of legal "intent."

"DirtRoadie" wrote in message
...
On Nov 9, 1:01 pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
You guys are not holding the state to their burden of proof. You guys
are so prejudiced against Dr. T and
you can't get around the fact that the guy actually didn't want to hurt
them with his car.

Try this one:
"Yes Judge, I pointed my loaded gun at the victim and pulled the
trigger. But I only intended to teach him a lesson. I had no idea the
bullet might actually hit him or hurt him. In fact, I never hit
anybody the last few times I shot at someone. "

MG - you don't begin to grasp the nature of legal "intent."

Pretty easy to see he's pulling chains and you're responding.

DirtRoadie wrote:

On Nov 9, 1:13*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:

How come the cyclists didn't slow down at all, according to their GPS?

Where do you come up with a nonsensical statement like that?

For one thing, I expect that the GPS would show that they came to a
very complete stop.

Not likely...most GOS units update themselves from satellites only once
every 2-3 seconds.






Other than that, all it can reasonably show is the speed they were
moving immediately before the incident. Can you point to some
description of testimony where anything different was suggested?

Just from what I heard through the grapevine. Or Grape Ape vine in my case
since I'm a ****ing gorilla.



You obviously were not in the courtroom and it was not televised.
Pleas don't try to tell us that you know better than the jury what was
presented.

I bet you I know the evidence better than the jury. Most juries are people
who never went to college and never paid attention in school. Showing them
evidence is like showing a religious idiot that nobody lives in the sky and
you don't go to heaven when you die just because it's written in some book
2,000 years ago.

If you put evolution on trial, most juries would be deadlocked in favor or
creationism. **** juries.

Magilla

On Nov 9, 2:46*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
DirtRoadie wrote:
On Nov 9, 1:13*pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:

How come the cyclists didn't slow down at all, according to their GPS?

Where do you come up with a nonsensical statement like that?

For one thing, I expect that the GPS would show that they came to a
very complete stop.

Not likely...most GOS units update themselves from satellites only once
every 2-3 seconds.

Bingo! That's why you can't tell how much or how quickly they slowed,
but you sure as hell can tell that after that 2 or 3 seconds there is
no more movement. That 's what would indicate a stop.

On Nov 9, 2:45*pm, "Tom Kunich" wrote:
"DirtRoadie" wrote in message

...

On Nov 9, 1:01 pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:
You guys are not holding the state to their burden of proof. You guys
are so prejudiced against Dr. T and
you can't get around the fact that the guy actually didn't want to hurt
them with his car.

Try this one:
"Yes Judge, I pointed my loaded gun at the victim and pulled the
trigger. But I only intended to teach him a lesson. I had no idea the
bullet might actually hit him or hurt him. In fact, I never hit
anybody the last few times I shot at someone. "

MG - you don't begin to grasp the nature of legal "intent."

Pretty easy to see he's pulling chains and you're responding.

Can't say that you're wrong.

"DirtRoadie" wrote in message
...
On Nov 9, 2:45 pm, "Tom Kunich" wrote:

Pretty easy to see he's pulling chains and you're responding.

Can't say that you're wrong.

This thread was the last straw and I simply put the fool on "ignore".

"DirtRoadie" wrote in message
...
On Nov 9, 2:46 pm, MagillaGorilla wrote:

Not likely...most GOS units update themselves from satellites only once
every 2-3 seconds.

Bingo! That's why you can't tell how much or how quickly they slowed,
but you sure as hell can tell that after that 2 or 3 seconds there is
no more movement. That 's what would indicate a stop.

Err - for the uninformed - a GPS accuracy is dependent upon the clock
stability and that is (relatively) crappy for a cheap GPS handheld.

Since the accuracy of the unit is dependent upon the stability of the clock
and the clock is stable but nowhere near stable enough for perfect
positional fixing, the speed, stopping distance and things like that simply
aren't accurate to anything near enough to use that sort of information to
determine "slowing" and that sort of thing over a period of seconds.