Posts by Adam Collins4

James Nguyen13 said:So, I saw this massive headline on Newsweek today: "Son of powerful Republican Party figure caught up in traffic accident scandal."
I can't help but wonder, will the media coverage stay this intense once the verdict comes down for Kennedy?

The thing is—if we're being honest—that son already killed someone once, also behind the wheel, and his old man just made sure the whole thing stayed buried...

Kennedy turned in his resignation as president of the HTS, but—get this—the HTS board actually rejected it...

briskbison55 said:It’s probably not going to help him much, trying to dodge Canada like that... I mean, let's be real, the EU doesn't really have borders anymore anyway. Pretty soon we'll just be opening up our own borders to the rest of Europe and vice versa. I guess if you screw over one political party, you end up screwing over all of them too. Maybe. It just feels like once you go there, there's no coming back from it.

I mean, regardless of those transparent attempts from that "genius" physicist last night to downplay everything... honestly, Kennedy just slammed into a car in the slower lane way too fast. He actually tried to claim there was fog when there clearly wasn't any—and then, get this, he had the nerve to blame the victims by saying their headlights weren't bright enough or something. It’s just wild. I really wonder how much longer this "brilliant mind" is going to keep bringing up the possibility of probation. :-)

Aha, so you're just talking nonsense regarding the collision, while I—the supposed "genius" who's actually correcting you—am just using demagoguery? Classic move from people writing about things they clearly don't understand...

Look, it's not my fault gym was your favorite subject back in school...

And the part about probation? That was brought up by actual lawyers... though I highly doubt your grasp of the law is any better than your grasp of physics, so, basically zero...

Nobody is saying he didn't hit them; the point is that we need to determine the exact speed...

People like you think a seventh grader could figure this out—it's a joke, really... though I suppose it does reflect your level of understanding of the subject matter...

Honestly, you don't truly feel cheated or played until you stumble upon something like this...

And of course—here come the excuses, where everyone starts pointing fingers and claiming they aren't the ones actually at fault...

Morgan Rodriguez57 said:So, what was the deal with that whole story about the woman losing control of her car, swerving right into the guardrail, bouncing back into the lane, and then—boom—that's when Čačić hit her? I mean, some news outlets actually went as far as publishing those little sketches to show how it happened... 🙂

It’s all just guesswork at this point—pure speculation, really. At the end of the day, it’s on the experts to actually dig in and do the heavy lifting to find out what's really going on.

And the second anyone dares to say a word against Čačić, the defense squad jumps in immediately...

Thomas Roberts2 said:There is absolutely no chance you will convince me to step up and defend Žužić.

In the end, we see the exact same mindset in both Žužić and Čačić—that pervasive sense of untouchability. It was this very arrogance, this belief that they were above the rules, that ultimately led to the deaths of innocent people.

Žužić is nothing more than a sheltered little trust-fund kid whose mother bled him dry until he finally managed to screw up on a massive scale.

On the other hand, Čačić is also incredibly wealthy, but more importantly, he belongs to that specific breed of politician—the kind that makes up the untouchable elite in America. They operate within their own sacred circle, seemingly above the law. However, he is particularly volatile and prone to crumbling under pressure.
His entire sense of arrogance and entitlement was on full display in that video, where he goes out of his way to humiliate that officer simply because he knows he's untouchable.

I have absolutely no doubt that this kind of manic attitude carries over behind the wheel, and on the road, that can be fatal. It’s a tragedy, really—it all ended up breaking two innocent people.

Not that I expect you to defend anyone...

You're just pointing out the differences... and regarding that level of culpability I mentioned earlier—the part where the court really needs to determine exactly how much there was...

Charles Martin2 said:

I think the street was called Drvinje
and there's that steep underpass
right by the traffic light
three cars had already collided, which I didn't account for
so I slammed the brakes and skidded
then someone else rear-ended me and that was it!
The police said it didn't matter and everyone except the first guy was at fault!

See, you blame me, but you defend Cacic
even though the situation is exactly the same!!!

Do you just hate me while you love Cacic?!

Look, I don't harbor any resentment toward the people who rear-ended me twice just to justify someone else... hatred isn't really a feeling I've ever carried for anyone...

And the cops said you were the one at fault, without even bothering to look at how bad the road actually was... but whatever...

It's not like I'm defending Cacic—I've said plenty of times that he's guilty and I can't wait for the trial to happen...

You're acting like me waiting for actual facts is some kind of defense...

briskbison55 said:Man, you're something else. You basically say that what I brought up isn't taught in middle school, and then you immediately start throwing out technical terms that aren't even covered in high school. But hey, if that makes you feel better...

Just because you don't get how friction works during braking or how to calculate speed based on skid marks, doesn't mean that stuff isn't part of the curriculum back in elementary school...

And just imagine when the Policia claims there were no skid marks at all because Cacic just slammed into the car because he didn't see it. But don't worry, I'll be right here to remind you that even middle schoolers know who's at fault when someone hits a car and kills two people in the process.

You know what's actually funny? If this involved someone like a major politician or some big-shot CEO from a huge corporation, you’d probably be demanding a public lynching or at least some kind of mob justice.

So let me ask you, does having a dual-mass flywheel have any impact at all? And you're still just trolling me about how I supposedly drove my own car straight into someone else's parked vehicle...

Oh, it matters. It totally matters. A dual-mass flywheel makes the weapon used in the killing way more interesting for the Policia and the forensic experts. But hey, once he gets out of prison—if he ever even sees the inside of one—at least he might find work driving a truck for an American.

Elastic and inelastic collisions... honestly, you're acting like that's high-level stuff they only teach in college or high school...

I'm asking specifically because it's clear you're confusing the two...

Your grasp on physics is pretty shaky, to say the least...

And you completely glossed over how having nearly double the mass significantly amplifies the impact and the resulting damage—if that's even the right way to put it.

Charles Martin2 said:

Get real!!!

I wasn't speeding.
Just braked hard.
Car slid on the black ice.
It was an old Ford and didn't even have ABS.

Hit the Ford in front of me.
Only snapped his license plate bracket!
It was a massive pileup with five cars involved!!

Who gave you the right to call someone a liar in a regular discussion?!?!
And you're out here defending a liar!!!!!

Look, you were speeding again, and I was following too close... and because of both of us, there's a crash...

Because clearly, if you had to slam the brakes like that, you weren't leaving enough space...

Roger Hughes14 said:Just look at the condition of Čačić's tank... it says everything you need to know about that gap...
He was driving way too fast... much faster than the car could actually handle. He’s like a kamikaze pilot, even if he doesn't realize it...

How much faster?

Words like "really fast" or "way faster" aren't exactly terms that math or physics recognize... and that's all I'm getting at here...

I’m not arguing about who’s at fault—I’m just saying we should probably leave the actual data and velocity calculations to the professionals...

briskbison55 said:but isn't it actually kinetic energy?

What about friction and all those formulas for calculating stopping distance?

Man, what formulas? I mean, it seems like you actually know better than to suggest we should just sit around waiting for the government agencies to finish their paperwork.

Did you even consider that the vehicle mass is almost double? Or does that not matter to you?

I’m telling you, just take your own car and smash it into a parked vehicle at that speed, then let us know if the mass makes the damage cost thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

And now we're onto "elastic collisions"? That bolded part really highlights just how much you know about physics...

Just because you don't grasp how friction works during braking—or how to calculate speed based on skid marks—doesn't mean those concepts aren't taught in basic middle school.

So, I'm asking you again: does having nearly double the mass make a difference? And yet, here you are, still trolling me about the idea of intentionally ramming my car into someone else's parked vehicle...

Charles Martin2 said:

Why should I care what anyone else mentioned?
Stop trying to lecture me, you're straight up lying!!!

So, is he the one at fault for the pileup, or is it the road in your opinion
that caused him to fly off it!!!!!????

I never drive too fast. I respect every single sign on the road
And I assume regular Americans do too, since they're pretty rare
when it comes to hiding pileups and causing deaths on the highway!!
I only had one accident once, back in Columbus
snow started coming down and I couldn't brake in time
hit the car in front of me, damage was minimal
but I still took the blame and paid the fine!!!

How many pileups have you caused? How many people have you killed?!?!?
You're alive, so shut it!!

See, you're lying when you claim you never speed...

You caused the accident because you were driving too fast...

And if I recall correctly, one of those total wrecks was someone swerving in from the side, while in the other case, someone else slammed into him...

Roger Hughes14 said:Survivor testimony indicates he was speeding—she was doing somewhere between 100 and 68 miles mph—which just wasn't safe for those road conditions. He didn't deny it either.(NU2)

Yeah, and then she goes in this one interview and tries to guess exactly how fast the vehicle coming up behind her was traveling...

Which is just impossible...

I mean, look—human beings don't just have this built-in speedometer in their heads... if that's even how you want to put it...

Thomas Roberts2 said:If he was intoxicated, he couldn't have possessed full awareness; his culpability would be diminished compared to Čačić, who made the conscious decision to exceed the speed limit given the road conditions.

And was he "impaired" when he left his house and hopped into a vehicle he wasn't even licensed to drive?

Was he also just "impaired" when he stumbled back into the car outside the local pub?

briskbison55 said:So, look, you have one object moving at speed A and another at speed B—that's basically seventh-grade math. I mean, if you aren't really into the whole physics thing, you could always just run your own little experiment. You know, maybe take your car and slam into a parked vehicle at the exact difference between the speed R. Čačić mentioned and whatever speed that driver from the Canadian car claimed. Then, I guess, you can decide for yourself who's actually telling the truth.

And what about the law of conservation of energy?

Where are the friction coefficients and the formulas for calculating braking distance?

Did you even bother to account for the fact that the vehicle's mass was nearly double? Or does that just not matter to you?

Thomas Roberts2 said:Why?

1. Žužić drove under the influence and caused one fatality by speeding.

2. Čačić wasn't drinking, but he consciously failed to adjust his speed to the road conditions, which resulted in two deaths.

In my view, the level of negligence is identical. Furthermore, both Žužić and Čačić share the exact same mindset when it comes to driving: irresponsible and arrogant, behaviors for which innocent people paid the ultimate price.

Look, Žužić was driving under the influence in a vehicle he shouldn't have even been operating in the first place...

That just doesn't put him in the same category as this other guy—because the second guy was actually driving a car he had a legal right to operate...

Plus, he's got a prior record for driving without a license, DUI, and speeding...

You claim Čačić made a conscious choice... well, Žužić made a conscious choice too, knowing damn well he was drunk and getting into a car he had no business touching...

Roger Hughes14 said:Of course, kamikazes in air traffic are intentional; they mean to end their flight with fatal results. But the way R. Čačić was driving just massively increased the odds of what actually happened.

I mean, sure... though we don't actually have the forensics yet to see how Čačić was really handling that thing...

briskbison55 said:I mean, obviously he was going way faster than he claimed. Honestly, anyone who finished middle school and actually paid attention in physics class knows that much.

If I recall correctly, they don't exactly cover that kind of stuff in a standard middle school science curriculum...

briskbison55 said:He’s guilty either way, I mean, come on. You can't just go around shooting people from the shadows without being at fault. And you definitely can't kill two people and walk away clean. It's just... it's a given. I guess the only real question left is how much a massive payout might actually keep him out of a cell.

I never even said he wasn't guilty...

The whole point of a trial is to figure out the exact degree of guilt... that's why we have sentencing guidelines ranging from one to five years, or maybe two to eight if you're looking at something like the legal standards in Canada...

Charles Martin2 said:

I never even brought up Žužić, stop making things up!!!!

If someone pulls a few reckless moves—they're an aggressive driver!
If someone causes a fatal wreck involving two people
it's the same thing, because they were the one DRIVING the car!!!!

In the very first hour of driver's ed, they teach you
that a car is basically a weapon if you don't handle it right!

Distracted driving, speeding, tailgating, driving too fast for conditions...
those aren't accidents, those are just descriptions of negligence. There's no such thing as "coincidence" here!!

And look, I'm not a party to this dispute or the accident, I'm just stating my view!!

Others mentioned Žužić and are trying to draw parallels there... which is a massive stretch...

Besides, how would you even know who's at fault for those minor collisions?

I'm sure you never speed, always maintain a safe following distance, and all that... just like every other average American...