Big truck

cueenvy said:
Wrong again. When he left the scene he was fubar.

You guys couldn't handle me either. Best to just do what you are good at, talking about chalk and your league matches.
Click to expand...

So you told the police, the insurance company and child protective services this exact story and they told you it's all good at least you got to prove your manhood.

How is it an insult to tell me to talk about pool related things on a pool related message board.
 
erhino41 said:
So you told the police, the insurance company and child protective services this exact story and they told you it's all good at least you got to prove your manhood.

How is it an insult to tell me to talk about pool related things on a pool related message board.
Click to expand...

The story is complete bullshit. He made it up. If you can't see the glaring contradictions in his story, you need a tinfoil helmet.
 
cueenvy said:
Whatever. ...you are soft...people make you the prison *****...that's what you'd be.
Click to expand...

You can give it a shot tuff guy!

Maybe "cue envy" means something else? You like the big "cues" do ya?

PS. With the $500 maybe your broke, cheap @%% can buy a PPV now
 
Last edited:
Shawn Armstrong said:
The story is complete bullshit. He made it up. If you can't see the glaring contradictions in his story, you need a tinfoil helmet.
Click to expand...

Lol. Yeah, a 16yr old probably got out and started walking towards his car and he sped off like the sweet little thing he is.
Jason
 
7de.jpg
jasonlaus said:
You can give it a shot tuff guy!
Click to expand...
 
jasonlaus said:
Lol. Yeah, a 16yr old probably got out and started walking towards his car and he sped off like the sweet little thing he is.
Jason
Click to expand...

The kid was on a Schwinn, if a collision at 10mph did less than $500 damage to his car. If a shopping cart hit my car in a parking lot, it would cost me $300 to get the damage fixed. Mind you, I'm not driving a 73 Pinto. So.....
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
The story is complete bullshit. He made it up. If you can't see the glaring contradictions in his story, you need a tinfoil helmet.
Click to expand...

I have a fine collection of tin foil hats. In fact I can custom make one for you if you want. Low deflection, too! 😉
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
The kid was on a Schwinn, if a collision at 10mph did less than $500 damage to his car. If a shopping cart hit my car in a parking lot, it would cost me $300 to get the damage fixed. Mind you, I'm not driving a 73 Pinto. So.....
Click to expand...

It's a tempo.....for there to be $500 damage he must have totaled it
Jason
 
Shawn Armstrong said:
The kid was on a Schwinn, if a collision at 10mph did less than $500 damage to his car. If a shopping cart hit my car in a parking lot, it would cost me $300 to get the damage fixed. Mind you, I'm not driving a 73 Pinto. So.....
Click to expand...

It was a Ford, the insurance company considered it totaled.
 
Don't start shit with kids in the car! I don't have kids, but if I did, I think that their safety should be my number one priority. If my young nephew was in the car, for instance, there is no way I'd try to start a fight. Kids safety takes priority over pride.
 
Last edited:
justadub said:
It's very likely he's been here before, under a different user name.

I have couple in mind, as to who he could have been previously.
Click to expand...

He sounds like that guy from new York who is a nurse who was banned a few years ago.

Came back under a new name and was banned again.

Ai t saying its the same guy but he displays the same attitude

.
 
lorider said:
He sounds like that guy from new York who is a nurse who was banned a few years ago.

Came back under a new name and was banned again.

Ai t saying its the same guy but he displays the same attitude

.
Click to expand...

:thumbup:

Great minds.....
 
easy-e said:
This is usually the case, but not always. I won't argue with you, but there are circumstances where the lead vehicle can be held liable. I'd also like to add that just because the vehicle code may find the tailgater at fault, doesn't necessarily mean that it SHOULD BE his fault. Think about it from a non-legal standpoint: If the driver doesn't suddenly stop, the accident never happens.
Click to expand...

Yes I understand that but the general rule is what I stated, I don't disagree with what you are saying there is an exception for every rule.
 
Poolplaya9 said:
Another common misconception people have is that doing something illegal automatically means that person is responsible or at least partially responsible for an accident. It doesn't. A few examples are someone driving without a license and/or insurance, and many people would think that since they shouldn't have been driving that they have some blame in an accident. The fact is that their lack of license or insurance is immaterial to and has zero to do with who is at fault in the accident. Another example would be an illegally parked car that gets hit. If an illegally parked car is hit it is pretty much never at fault. The fault lies with whoever hit it. Illegal does not necessarily mean at fault--not even a little bit at fault.

On a slightly side note, stopping suddenly is almost never illegal. Essentially if you were trying to avoid hitting something, there is no problem with it. Whoever rears ends you is solely at fault. Now if you suddenly stop for no other reason than you are trying to intentionally cause an accident by getting the person behind you to rear end you, then you are are partially at fault. The person in the rear is partially at fault as well for following too close. But as mentioned earlier the reality is the front driver is never going to admit to doing it to intentionally cause an accident and that there was nothing he was trying to avoid hitting, so unless there are some good witnesses the rear driver will still be found to be fully at fault.
Click to expand...

Glad to see someone gets it! :thumbup:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top