EVModules said:
The trouble isn't with the front row of motorists who noticed, but the other vehicles following. If there's a multi-vehicle pile up, one could argue effectively about the officer's discretion to slam shut traffic from 60 mph to 0 in a hurry. In Southern California, it's not uncommon to have secondary TC's as a result of the original TC as I've responded to multiples. Guess one has to take many factors into play with regards to density of traffic, weather, visibility, and road conditions. In rush hour, a single officer on foot can stop an entire 10 lane interstate in broad daylight as opposed to sparse traffic at 0200 in the morning. As with all emergency personnel, no one should be put into harm's way despite the necessity of the situation, otherwise known as "Sizing up & securing the scene" before rendering assistance directly.
I don't care for the fault of the motorist that hit him at all, zero. The blame actually rest squarely on the motor officer because he did not take into consideration of the safety of himself by the way he handled it despite what traffic laws says because sometimes, it contradicts with physics and human nature. Guess which two of the three doesn't get broken?
Quote of the day: Never drive faster than your guardian angel can fly. ~Author Unknown
You are entitled to your opinion on the matter, but the Officer did nothing 'wrong'. I would have done it slightly different, but the same result would have likely happened with those two morons in their vehicles driving up on that road closure in that country.
Personally, I could care less about multi-vehicle pile-ups. Nobody was saying 60 to 0 in 2 seconds, or suggesting that method. People run into one another because they are #1 going to fast for conditions and #2 tailgating and #3 doing everything but driving.
I respond and handle crashes 2 miles from the original crash as well, its nothing new, and is the result of 1, 2 and 3 I noted.
As I said, I would have done things slightly different. But, even so, I think that asshat in the green car, and the minivan behind it would still have run into the bike and the officer, who had every legal right to close the road and did nothing out of the ordinary. It was not on a curve in the road, or crest of a hill. If so, I'd be the first one to say WRONG, close it before those road features. He may have made some assumptions that were a bad idea, but the responsibility of the crash, is the result of two motorists driving with their heads up their ass. If a crash occurs suddenly in front of me, should I instead, drive around the block and come back to it for fear of being run-into because I didn't gradually stop traffic? Or avoid the crash, stop safely come back around with a U-turn and block the road? And yes, the sad part is, until traffic slows down and backs-up, I have to watch that more than what I'm doing with the crash and people involved. Sad. The truck driver clearly was paying attention and the vehicles behind should have noticed the lane change and wondered why and moved over also. If the motorcop did something so erroneous, the truck would have hit the officer and the two smaller vehicle drivers would never have noticed. I've seen idiot drivers crash into fully marked, overhead lightbar equipped patrol vehicles blocking lanes in the same manor. SOMEONE has to come up to the road/lane closure first and start the chain of events to slow down approaching traffic.
My point is, don't monday-night-quarterback the officer so far as to say HE is responsible for that crash because thats completely bullshit. I would expect that from a couch troll watching television, but not someone who claims to be involved in emergency services.