Try as you might, squid, but the laws apply to bikes too, even if you would rather be playing boy racer on public roads instead of meandering along in traffic.

Sorry, you can try and try and try but you can’t rationalize this one in to innocence for the motorcyclist.

Thanks for arguing the semantics.... how about substitute the word “crash” for “accident”?

They very well may have been trespassing, but at this point it’s Tesla’s word against RJG’s and both have self interest as their primary concern so neither should be taken at their word. In other words, it can’t be known at this point.

Paparazzi tend to annoy the fuck out of everyone, but they dont usually throw punches/assault people. Easily excitable rent-a-cops on the hand....

I would think they would be more likely to get fired if photo’s were published that were taken on their watch of things Tesla would rather not have made public.

two words: cash settlement

But as of now, its he said - he said. Tesla claims they were trespassing, the RGJ says they were on publicly accessible land.

Because paparazzi and photographers have never been roughed up by security for taking pictures of things their clients would rather not have published. Riiiiight.

I’m not arguing your point one bit but, Toyota Civic? Please go sit in the corner and think about that.

While I mostly agree with your sentiment, you lost all credibility when your wrote “Toyota Civic” on a car blog. Please see yourself out.

“ but this notion that the existence of the DY automatically means that the road is hazardous for passing in that location is a cop out.”

Really? We’re getting excited because a car that costs $82,000 (base price, this is a Porsche so most will ring in around $100k) can top 300kph?

Ask yourself how: often do people smoking pot get shot in the head by crazed anti-drug activists? And then ask: how often do people passing on double yellow lines get in accidents? You are ignoring the concept of probability.

Or there could be a hidden driveway, or a farm crossing or a hill concealing a semi or any number of other risks that one would reasonably assume could exist due to the existing of a DOUBLE FUCKING YELLOW LINE!

The driver of the car is an absolute and utter shithead, no question, But the motorcyclist is also, to only a…

No, I’ve consistently condemned the driver as a psychotic asswipe.

Yes, there is. Context is key.

This is more akin to “if you didn’t want to be shot in a home invasion you shouldn’t be running a drug lab”.

It was reasonable to assume that passing on a DY could be dangerous to the point of injury or even death.

Not attempted murder, aggravated assault (or possibly not even that depending on the outcome of the court case).

The driver of the car is an absolute shit head, no doubt about it. But come on, DY, no license and lets be honest, he was absolutely speeding (just no way for it to be proven in court so no charge). He’s hardly a blameless victim in this scenario. The only real victim is the female passenger.

Not attempted murder, aggravated assault (and he hasn’t even been conviected of that yet...). But who cares, rate because INTERNET RAGE!!