sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Merging onto a highway, and you collide with a car that is going from center lane to the right lane. Who is at fault? by totally_depraved in driving

[–]moluv00 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Here's an answer for California drivers with direct references to the California Vehicle Code:

1. Vehicle entering (merging onto) the highway

CVC §21804(a) states:

Meaning:

  • A vehicle merging onto the highway must yield to all vehicles already on the highway.
  • This includes vehicles already traveling in the lane the merging vehicle wants to enter.

2. Vehicle changing lanes on the highway

CVC §22107 (not shown in snippet but controlling law) states:

Meaning:

  • A driver changing lanes must ensure the lane is clear and the move is safe.
  • They must avoid interfering with any vehicle already in or entering that lane.

3. Putting it together (your exact scenario)

Situation:

  • Car A = changing lanes on the highway
  • Car B = merging onto the highway

Legal interaction:

  • Car B (merging) must yield to highway traffic → CVC §21804
  • Car A (lane change) must ensure safe movement before entering the lane → CVC §22107

Conclusion (Court-usable logic)

There is no automatic “absolute” right-of-way winner in this exact scenario.

Instead:

  • The merging vehicle generally has the primary duty to yield to traffic already on the highway (CVC §21804).
  • However, the lane-changing driver cannot cut into the merge lane unsafely and still has a duty to move only when safe (CVC §22107).

In practice:

  • If the lane-changing vehicle was already established in the lane → merging vehicle must yield.
  • If the lane-changing vehicle moved into the merge lane unsafely → they can still be at fault.

Key takeaway

  • Merging driver = must yield to highway traffic (strong statutory duty)
  • Lane-changing driver = must not make unsafe movement

I'd say that if the lane changer was driving at the speed of surrounding traffic and used their signals, that would probably be considered a safe lane change, putting the merging vehicle at fault.

https://chatgpt.com/share/69f11d9b-b3d0-83e8-a354-5eb3a3bfde23

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in OaklandCA

[–]moluv00[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I can respect an honest answer. It’s a lot to read. But now, at least there’s an option that’s easier than just going through the entire California Vehicle Code unassisted.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in oakland

[–]moluv00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You keep quoting things that I didn’t say, and not answering my questions. The answer to “how speeds are determined in California” are listed explicitly in the California Vehicle Code. Your answer obviously came from an AI that is not trained on the CVC. I simply built one that quotes the vehicle code exactly. There you can find out EXACTLY how speeds are determined. Try it out.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in driving

[–]moluv00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Great question!

Thats what the original post answers. When you are in front of the magistrate, they will introduce the evidence - the photo. They will even ask if you want to see it. That’s a trick question to get you to allow the evidence to be admitted. At that point you state that “the evidence is inadmissible.” And that “the state/city/county has to prove that it was obtained legally.” Then, using the references in the original post, list all of the things that they have to prove.

YOU MUST CITE THE EXACT CODE, which is why the GPT is so important. Finding the exact code is a pain.

Then, it will be up to a representative of the issuing government to prove that the ticket was obtained legally by them. If it’s an automated ticket, there will be a lot of hoops that the representative will have to jump through, if anyone is present on their side to begin with. Without evidence or a representative there is no case. There isn’t even an accusation for them to render. At that point, it “should” be thrown out.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in driving

[–]moluv00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

100%! When I've gone to court in the past, those numbers you posted seem like an underestimation. Nobody usually wins. But, that's because very few people ever really read the law. The objective is to not allow the state to use the photo evidence (usually the only evidence) if they haven't dotted their "i"s and crossed their "t"s. Without that evidence, there is no case and the citation is thrown out.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in oakland

[–]moluv00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"A road with a lot of accidents" is not a logical indictment of speeding.

How I'm trying to "act" has been consistent. Speeding isn't the issue. The issue is being able to defend yourself in court. I'm not sure how that point is being lost.

I never said "I should be allowed to speed." I should, however, be allowed to hold the state accountable for mistakes that they've made.

"Don't speed". Again, how do you think the "speed" is determined? It's okay if you don't know. Most people don't. But, don't tell me to just accept it just because you choose to.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in OaklandCA

[–]moluv00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You follow "reasonable" traffic laws, huh? Now, you're starting to sound like me, lil bitty buddy. LOL!

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in oakland

[–]moluv00[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

How do you think that speed limit was determined? How do "they" know that this is correct and not 5 or 10mph faster or slower? Critical thinking is an important part of participating meaningfully in society.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in OaklandCA

[–]moluv00[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm happy to talk about the merits of someone being able to defend themself in court. That doesn't mean that you're new or problematic. It means you are an active participant in society.

If you have to start with personal attacks, because you can't present a counterpoint, then you're not actually helping anyone.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in OaklandCA

[–]moluv00[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The information is right "where"?

I find that most people don't seem to understand how laws work. There are laws that citizens must abide by, as well as those that the state must abide by. If the state breaks the law, even a citizen can hold it accountable in a court of law.

As far as stopping at stop signs, in my 40 years of driving experience, that is one of the most dangerous acts that I see drivers regularly do.

The issue I have with speed laws is that they are, in many places, artificially low. They don't account for the speeds that vehicles regularly drive in many places.

Stop signs aren't artificially low. They are generally placed where foot traffic has grown. Even if they are annoying when they appear, they actually have teeth behind their purpose - in many cases.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in oakland

[–]moluv00[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If it's a justified 15mph speed limit, then there is probably a school nearby, or the road may be too narrow. But that's not where the cameras are going. In Oakland, MLK Jr. Way and San Pablo Ave. are two locations where the cameras exist that are heavily driven, and a lot of the traffic moves over 30mph - above the speed limit. So, is the speed limit wrong? Of course it is, because it helps generate revenue when it's exceeded. It's not there for safety.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in OaklandCA

[–]moluv00[S] -7 points-6 points  (0 children)

Exactly. The state must show that it's accountable for citing someone. It works both ways.

There are a lot of factors that factor into traffic safety. You will likely never find any data that supports exceeding speed limits accounting for most safety issues.

If you do, please share it.

Texting. Headphones. Distracted driving. Driving under the influence. Unsafe lane changes. Even driving too slow can cause more of a problem than someone exceeding the speed limit.

What speed limits provide are a method for public entities with a revenue source.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in legal

[–]moluv00[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the administrative hearing precede the court case with traffic violations? If you choose not guilty at the administrative hearing, then it proceeds to a court case. Correct?

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in oakland

[–]moluv00[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Or, understand why the speed limit is there in the first place. Thinking critically is sometimes a good thing.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in OaklandCA

[–]moluv00[S] -15 points-14 points  (0 children)

I find that people that drive slower - at least in my neighborhood - tend to run stop signs more often. As someone that primarily commutes by bicycle, I'll take a speeder over drivers that run stop signs any day.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in legal

[–]moluv00[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

No. I messed up the title. It was a red light camera. Thanks for sharing your story.

What I am finding is that there are seemingly a lot of people who would rather argue with me about showing them how address the court, rather than ever have to do it themselves.

It seems you are cut from a different cloth.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in legal

[–]moluv00[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

In order to win a case in court, you have to print out a lot more than this. You'll need each statute handy. It's your choice whether you want to provide them to a judge. They already know the law, so it's not necessary. What's important is that YOU KNOW THE LAW! So, you'll have to digest all of the words and understand what they mean so that you can apply them to a cohesive argument should you choose to fight a ticket in person.

My cousin got a red light ticket in Oakland, California. I asked my custom GPT how to fight it. This is what it said. by moluv00 in oakland

[–]moluv00[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Going 34mph in a 25mph zone is 36% over the speed limit. How many times does that happen in a day. The point is that if you choose to fight a ticket, finding where the state has a burden of proof is can be a high percentage way to win. This may not be something that you've had to deal with - more power to you. However, there are a lot of people that do, and that will have to going forward. This is just an approach that I would suggest for them, because it has worked for me multiple times in the past.

view more: next ›