Thread We should make common sense a high school requirement.

it's not the drivers choice to decide the extent of injury, dum dum. they are obligated by law to stay. jesus, you're dense.
 
it's not the drivers choice to decide the extent of injury, dum dum. they are obligated by law to stay. jesus, you're dense.

dense???


fucktard!!! How does she know she is injured???? If the preception is that there is no injury, the people will act accordingly. And according to that law you posted, they don't have to stop.

And I'm fucking dense??? this is fucking ridiculous!
 
:lol: yes, they HAVE to stop. THEY HIT SOMEONE. god dammit you are so fucking STUPID :lol:

No you do not have to stop just because you hit someone. It says clearly in the link you provided that only in the case of injury or death does the driver have to stop. Go read the definition of perception and get back to me..
 
I wish had my own little world where i was always right like liam does

oh you too want to join the fucktards? I can prove to you that I have admitted I was wrong here on UF multiple times.. but hey, I'm not apart of the group, so no matter the facts of the situation, I'll never be supported here..
 
oh you too want to join the fucktards? I can prove to you that I have admitted I was wrong here on UF multiple times.. but hey, I'm not apart of the group, so no matter the facts of the situation, I'll never be supported here..

I'm not joining anything. In this particular case, I think you are completely wrong.
 
Then say that?

okay. In this case, it is my belief that you are completely wrong. Here's why.

Was there an injury sustained from the crash? YES, there was. It may not have been perceived by the driver, but there was an injury nonetheless as a result of the accident. The law doesn't state that the injury has to be an obvious one. It is the responsibility of the driver to provide his information, which the driver did not do.
 
Last edited: