By Mark Frauenfelder at 12:53 pm Mon, Sep 6, 2010
(Video link | Benny Hillified video link) After the driver hits a car, he or she tries and fails to make a quick getaway.
And to think, all he had to do was go find the guy he hit, apologize and trade insurance info. A tiny little fender bender won’t cost you *that* much. Now his Mercedes is all trashed, he’s being charged with fleeing the scene of an accident and reckless driving, youtube comments are flying. Was “sorry” that hard to say?
I took the headline literally and was thinking that was the laziest getaway I’d ever seen, and the driver must have counting the loot when they hit the parked car. Now I get it.
The dog running by is classic.
Did he died?
No, no, that should be “Was he died?”
Did he died.
I’m sorry, but this really irks me: the title of the YouTube video is “Woman wrecks her Mercedes”, even though the person driving never appears in the video. The uploader just assumed. Screw you, uploader!
The uploader writes in the video description on YouTube that after uploading the video s/he saw a news report about the incident and acknowledges that the driver was a drunk man. Also, FWIW, the car does not look like a Mercedes.
I totally agree with you Oskar. If I had to make an assumption based on the dick move of not giving insurance info I wouldn assume a guy. Maybe a guy who is drunk too. But assumptions in absence of proof are wrong too.
It could be a child. Or a senior. Or an alien.
If you go to the YT video, it says that it’s a guy and he’s drunk.
That is so much worse than when someone ascribes malicious motives to another person rather than assuming that person might be misinformed.
Know what’s worse? When the ingrained sexism is glaringly obvious, and some jerk has to try to defend it, or pretend that we’re just being ~sensitive~.
They weren’t “misinformed”. They either assumed it was a woman (because of course, women are bad drivers!), or due to their bias (women are bad drivers, DUH!), ignored the information that was given to them. Both are hugely problematic.
And on the slim chance that they were misinformed, someone misinformed them — because of course women are horrible drivers!
Do you not see how problematic thatis?
Is it just me, or is “DUI” written all over this…?
I especially like how the driver knocks over a post, and impales the car. Now THAT’S talent!
That’s true! It could have been a young girl! Shouldn’t you be making your complaint on You Tube!? Perhaps they got her license plate off the bumper she left behind!
I can understand the bystander’s wariness…
I have a cool story bro:
A few years ago, I was coming home from the store and came upon a man in a pickup who was stuck far off the road and in some pretty heavy brush. Judging by the tracks in the snow, he’d had quite a flight off the road. I stopped and started over to see if he was hurt but realized he was still in gear and was attempting to back out. His efforts were getting more and more frenetic and I could hear stuff breaking on his truck so I backed off, not wanting to get run over, and waited for him to realize he was stuck but good. As he struggled I called the police. Finally, he shut the truck off and I walked over to check on him. Just as I was tapping on the window to get his attention, the police arrived. He rolled down the window and the stench of Jim Beam rolled over me. I said cheerfully, “Hey man, the police are here to help you!”
I dunno if it’s a Mercedes, but it’s certainly a diesel given the black exhaust, and that kind of points towards it being a Mercedes.
If you want to see some obviously mentally deficient people being misogynistic then I recommend the comments section on YouTube for this video.
You say deficient as if it’s possible for them to replenish their intelligence. I don’t think Misogyny is a result of being mentally weak, it’s a result of being unwise. Take your classist, and intellectualist talk elsewhere.
Matt J. how prejudice of you to assume the misogynists are mentally deficient. Those might be highly intelligent, or of average mental capacity, misogynists.
I can totally envision that guy on his ride-on toy when he was little — smashing into coffee tables, door jambs, and people’s shins.
Just drunk, or drunk and angry, or drunk and crazy?
Or, you know…drunk AND angry AND crazy?
I think I just had a schadenfreugasm.
It strikes me as odd that there is a big oil slick right where the car eventually runs into the post. Was that left there from a practice run? Is this a fake fail vid with a junk car?
I see what you did there.
Hmmm…. The spectators who appear at the end are in fact assembling behind the building starting at ~29 seconds. To see them, find the reflection of the parked car’s flashing tail-light. Just to the left of this reflection, you will see people walking from left to right, but stopping before they step into view. The first person appears at 29 seconds, then the rest at around 40 seconds. (You can verify that this is a view through the glass by watching the first pass of the black dog.)
Seems odd that people would stand just out of sight for almost half a minute before appearing at precisely the moment the car drives away….. Maybe it’s fake–a kideo. Or maybe the people were just being prudent. But still–not ONE of them stuck their head around the corner for a better view??
I think that at their angle relative to the corner of the building, they could probably see just fine. They probably held back because they didn’t want to get run over.
I tell you what – if you saw that kind of driving in person, would you want to get anywhere near where that car could end up?
I’d be hiding behind a building watching too. Once the engine is stopped, the stupid-o-tron weapon would be disarmed and then I’d get closer – either for giggles or to provide assistance (assuming drunk driving at the scene is a no-no, they could be diabetic, having a heart attach etc). As long as that idiot is revving about and trying to get away, your fate could be that of the other car, pole, gutter, their rear bumper etc.
The dog. It walked one way, ran back after the accident, and took the other road. Why?
People arriving on the scene afterwards, one of them runs that way too!
What is happening down that road?
First, I think the guy didn’t get far after tearing up his undercarriage. They’re probably chasing him down.
Second, I think the dog didn’t want to get blamed for the damage.
You could be right about the dog, although it doesn’t explain why it ran back and away.
I understood the people running after the car: it was the people running down the other road that puzzled me. I guess they were just with the dog.
Since when is the Bennyhillifier working again? Sweet!
I’m quite sure this is a pretty old failblog video
Grey Devil, in future BB editors will run all posts by you, just to make sure they’re not old to YOU. Because after all, this site is all about YOU.
I sure hope so. It would be a tragedy if Failblog wasn’t first.
1. i think this is driving under influence, too. typical loss of peripheral vision, followed by crash while in a curve, followed by fleeing, followed by too much acceleration followed by another crash.
2. diesel does not equal mercedes at least not in europe (to me it looks like a BMW 3 series, but its hard to tell after all the backwards engineering into “piece of metal”
3. the smoke appearing is not feature, its a bug. indian smoke signal for – you managed to get a lot of oil into the fuel cycle that does not belong there.
All you have to do is get the VIN number off of the bumper and the person is screwed. No need to go chasing after them, though i can understand the need to do so.
And I sure hope this drunken asshole does time. But I have to admit it was fun watching his car polevault!
With youtube’s html5 and the speedup to 2x it should, in theory, be possible to easily benny hillify all youtube videos.
I call shenanigans. The trunk is loose and the back bumper is already damaged as the car initially drives in frame (from a previous “attempt”?).
The wet/oily spot at the post is suspicious too.
This totally looks set up.
At least he signaled.
I’m pretty sure driving style is a more reliable indicator of functional intelligence than the traditional IQ tests. Obviously, Fall Guy here didn’t do too hot on his exam.
There’s somewhat of an inverse relationship between driving ability and IQ.
Really? Tell me more. It might make me feel better at being a not-always-so-hot driver, but a pretty damn good test taker.
Also, I definitely re-watched this so I could see the dog run back after I saw it mentioned…
Mail (will not be published) (required)
Submit a tip
The rules you agree to by using this website.
Who will be eaten first?
Jason Weisberger, Publisher
Ken Snider, Sysadmin