Russian bus driver enjoys punishing drivers who cut him off

Bus driver Alexei Volkov, aka "The Punisher," is famous in Russia for exacting revenge on the rude drivers in the city of Zelenograd by simply not slowing down when they cut him off. Volkov claims to have been involved in more than 100 accidents in his career and the clips from his dashcam.

(Via Lileks)


  1. My new hero. I’d love to do this to morons who drive like that. I just have to settle for tailgating anyone who decides to pull into my braking gap. I figure they want to get rear ended so they won’t mind.

      1. They’re clearing making an unsafe lane change. They are entirely at fault. This is no different that turning into someone in your blind spot.

        1. They’re at fault when they make the unsafe lane change. If the person they cut off doesn’t drop back to a safe following distance, then that person is at fault for failing to maintain a safe following distance.

          Punishing unsafe driving by driving unsafely is not very smart.

          1. I know that. That’s why I don’t really do it. I just talk big on the internet.

            However, I do like to drive at exactly the speed limit in the HOV lane. It amuses me.

          2. @foobar

            Why would I get a ticket? It’s not an overtaking lane.


            Should I get out of the HOV lane if the vehicle behind me wants to pass?

            There is no law requiring either one to move over in such a situation, and you do not have a legal obligation to move out of the HOV Lane to allow speeding vehicles by. However, the Washington State Patrol suggests that it is usually best for a vehicle in the HOV lane to move over, when safe to do so.  This allows the aggressive driver by and could prevent a road rage incident.The HOV lane is a separate facility from the rest of the freeway and is not the “fast lane.”

          3. From your link:

            although a ticket may be issued if you are impeding “normal and reasonable movement of traffic” in the lane per Revised Code of Washington 46.61.425.

            Hopefully they start enforcing the law in Washington, too.

          4. So I should get a ticket for speeding instead of getting a ticket for impeding speeding drivers?

            Hey, I’m all for driving faster. I’m from the UK and driving at 60 feels ludicrously slow to me, but that’s the law and there’s a lot of police around enforcing it, so what are you gonna do? Should I pull all the way across to the right hand lane to let one asshat past, then pull all the way back? Would that make you happy?

            If I am driving at the speed limit, plus a small percentage, I’m doing my bit for not impeding regular traffic flow. Besides which, there’s a perfectly good overtaking lane just to the right. I generally find people notice it and use it when they finally start paying attention to what they’re doing. I find it really odd that drivers over here prefer to tailgate people and intimidate them into pulling over rather than changing lanes themselves.

            Thanks for wishing me all those tickets though. I hope you drive into a tree.

          5. What kind of logic is that? Would you place a driver at fault if they failed – for whatever reason – to swerve in time to avoid an oncoming out of control car? No? Then why the hell would you fault a driver for failing to brake to avoid these jackasses? IANAL, but if the actions of another driver precipitate the accident as a whole, logically that would suggest that they are the party at fault.

            Also, how would you rather the unsafe driving be punished? Should the bus driver have a pen and paper handy to attempt to take down license plate numbers of moving vehicles in moderate traffic? Do you honestly expect any complaints or reports to the authorities to have any non-negligable impact on these unruly drivers or their driving habits?

            I’m all for rule of law, but there comes a point where bureaucracy and systemic failures makes reliance on pure governmental enforcement untenable. This bus driver does nothing wrong, endangers no one, is guilty only of not preventing the damage others recklessly instigate, and creates a lasting personal impact on the unsafe drivers he refuses to enable or accomodate. Their actions no longer merely have nebulous potential future consequences, but concrete immediate consequences. Instead of a hypothetical letter in the mail eventually, they have to deal immediately with a minor accident that they clearly and irrefutably caused. It gives them a physical shock, it makes a lasting impression, which stern letter or punitative fine can accomplish after the fact.

          6. I wasn’t talking about the bus, I was talking about Daneel’s comment.

            If an accident happens because someone cuts Daneel off, then that accident is the fault of the person doing the cutting off. But if an accident happens because Daneel intentionally maintains an unsafe distance *after* being cutoff, then the accident would be at least partly Daneel’s fault.

            And as far as having an impact on the behavior of unruly drivers, why would you think that Daneel’s behavior — or even the bus driver’s behavior — would have any positive effect on that? Unsafe drivers — at least in the US — tend to be very creative at explaining why any accidents they get into are obviously someone else’s fault.

          7. Would you place a driver at fault if they failed – for whatever reason – to swerve in time to avoid an oncoming out of control car?

            I would seriously question the judgement of any driver who consciously chose not to do so.

          8. I honestly can’t believe someone is arguing, in all sincerity, what you appear to be arguing.  

            There is a world of difference, legally, morally and to anyone with common sense, between a driver who cannot avoid a collision and one who could but deliberately does not do so.  A response to dangerous behaviour isn’t justified if it is itself much more dangerous.

            While the bus driver’s actions may (possibly) have beneficial effects, the chance of a serious accident right now is real.  The claim that the bus driver is doing nothing wrong and endangers no one is ridiculous.

            I’m for the rule of law, too, and I know Russia’s traffic culture might be a lot different than the one I’m used to.  But you’d give license to anyone who felt they’d been wronged on the road to enforce the law exactly at the time they’re least likely to use their good judgement in a manner that’s much more dangerous than the initial wrong. 

            Writing down the license plate of the offender is, as you imply, impractical.  
            But it doesn’t seem to occur to you that there might be others.  One which comes readily to mind only requires you to lift a finger (a single, specific one.)  Another solution, much less dangerous than this bus driver’s, would be to do /nothing at all./  Not every injustice ought to be avenged, and certainly not in a way that’s much worse than the original offense.     

          9. I think there is a principle in traffic law that the last person who can take action to avoid a collision has some fault, even if the initiator has broken the law in order to put you into that position.  Otherwise it would be legal to mow down jaywalkers.

          10. But you can still do it in the wild wild west of Russian roads where justice is served with a dented bumper.

          11. You guys do realize this is Russia right? There’s a whole, huge difference of mindset there as far as dealing with traffic. I’ve been there, and it’s the guy with the biggest balls who takes the day. Also if this guy is a city bus driver, it’s automatically YOUR fault if there’s an accident with city property. That’s how he can continue to do this with obvious impunity.

        2. In Illinois, you can be cited for “failure to avoid a  collision”. Basically the laws are written in a way that requires drivers to keep a safe distance from any other traffic, and if you hit them you clearly failed to do so, regardless of who is at fault.

          So ramming  a guy who cut you off won’t get you far in that state (and I think lots of other states have similar clauses).

          1. The obvious intent of such laws is to prevent tailgating, though.

            Furthermore, I’d hardly call this a case of maintaining a proper “following distance”, as the bus isn’t following the offending car. The offending car is suddenly and purposefully placing itself into a dangerous position far too close to the front of the bus, and then decelerating. It’s one thing if you’re tailgating someone for miles and then ram into them when they slow down for traffic ahead. It’s something else entirely when they pull in front of you and slow down for no logical reason.

          2. Any judge with half a brain would look at some of these accidents and see the person changing lanes left NO room and they were clearly at fault.

      2. You can’t say he was following too close when you changed lanes with no warning and barely any space

      3. They all pulled in a foot off his front bumper when there was plenty of room in front of him to make a safe lane change. And he has the proof.

        1. Plus some of them even hit their brakes right after doing that.  Either they were trying to commit accident fraud or they were doing it out of spite.

    1. I’m afraid I can’t agree. This wasn’t just a private matter between the bus driver and the bad drivers in the other cars: any one of those collisions could have put other lives at risk, be they passengers or other motorists. That second car appeared to be a taxi so some poor passenger probably got a hell of a scare just for picking the wrong cab that day.

      When you’re driving on a public road and surrounded by innocent people there’s a certain moral responsibility to attempt to avoid traffic accidents even if you technically have right of way.

      1. At what cost?

        The authorities are neither willing nor capable to enforce this sort of traffic infraction. By avoiding these unsafe drivers, you in effect enable their unsafe driving. By removing any consequences from their actions, you ultimately encourage lazy and reckless driving.

        Where do you draw the line? Yes, you have a moral obligation to avoid endangering people on the road. But you also have a moral obligation to enact effective change in the driving behaviors of others who might endanger people on the road. If the only other option is to let this sort of unsafe behavior go unpunished, you are morally obligated to make a certain degree of compromise.

        I’d not advocate failing to slow down in a truly dangerous situation. If the speeds were higher, if the risk was greater, if the damage was more severe, if there were ANY significant injuries to speak of in the more than hundred cases this bus driver claims to have been involved in, I might consider it to be a poorer trade of risk and reward. But given the evidence available, I feel the bus driver was perfectly justified in choosing a known minor present evil over an unknown larger future evil.

        1. I’d not advocate failing to slow down in a truly dangerous situation.

          Any one of those situations could have turned “truly dangerous” in a heartbeat. It’s only a matter of time before he rear-ends a bad driver who reacts by swerving into a pedestrian or oncoming traffic.

          We have the benefit of hindsight watching this video because we know that none of those situations turned deadly. The bus driver did not have such knowledge when he chose not to avoid those collisions.

          Also, who do you think pays for any damage incurred to the bus? Not the bus driver, I expect.

          1.  Hopefully, it’s the other driver, since they are the ones at fault. But seriously, driving a bus as he is, this sort of action is probably the SAFEST he can for his passengers. He’s got momentum on his side, and he probably has to stop a lot less sharply than he would have to avoid an accident completely – and avoiding the risk of someone behind HIM getting caught unawares and actually find him and his company at fault when he stops unexpectedly and extremely quickly…

          2. The safest action for all parties would be somewhere in between “slam the brakes hard and skid to a stop” and “maintain speed as if the other car wasn’t there.”

          3. This.  He’s driving a bus: stopping quickly would be dangerous for his passengers; and besides, even jamming on his brakes probably wouldn’t stop an accident from happening anyway, based on these videos.  Even worse, some of the examples are in slick conditions, which can cause some bad fishtailing in a bus.

            I’m impressed with how stupidly the other drivers were driving.  They weren’t cutting someone off as much as driving right across the front of a bus.  Not a great long term driving style.

          4. There’s a little thing called a calculated risk, or a judgement call.

            In a truly dangerous situation, a situation in which there was clear and apparant danger, a situation such as highspeed highway travel, hazardous weather or road conditions, or some other similarly obvious source of risk, I imagine Alexei would have employed his brakes.

            When I watch the above video, I personally get the sense of a driver who knows his vehicle and who understands the level of risk he is committing to. He is able to weigh the odds and make a snap judgement as to how he should respond. With over a hundred such accidents, and absolutely no evidence of injury or serious risk, I conclude that Alexei has very good judgement. Furthermore, I can conclude from basic logic that there must be untold numbers of other instances in which he judged differently – in which he DID apply his brakes, and DID avoid accidents which would have been genuinely dangerous.

            Taking calculated risks is a healthy, valuable human trait that Americans as a whole seem to have lost. Everyone seems afraid of what MIGHT have happened, without any regard for what was LIKELY to have happened, and what ultimately DID happen.

            They’re outraged that a certain negative outcome was even made remotely possible, nevermind the odds, nevermind the relevant prowess or judgement of the parties involved. How dare people rely on their instincts and skills and critical thinking ability in time of potential danger! They should be held liable for any failure to assume their own incapacity to manage the situation, no matter how unreasonable or negative the ultimate effect of doing so!

          5. There’s a little thing called a calculated risk, or a judgement call.

            And the thing this bus driver chose to risk wasn’t his own life or vehicle, it was other lives and vehicles.

            Everyone seems afraid of what MIGHT have happened, without any regard for what was LIKELY to have happened, and what ultimately DID happen.

            Your stated justification for allowing these collisions to happen is purely hypothetical (“maybe they’ll be better drivers now!). Meanwhile, the actual consequences (traffic delays, terrified commuters, damage to the bus among others) are objectively real.

          6. They’re also objectively not the bus driver’s fault, but the fault of the instigating drivers.

      2. Where I live, it’s actually in statute that if taking the right-of-way will cause a collision, then one does not have the right-of-way.

        This driver is driving a very large, harder-to-stop vehicle.  Some of these collisions are attributable to the drivers cutting him off because of that, but a much larger number are only attributable to this driver’s intentional malice.  The pickup that he hit, then kept hitting, for example, should have been enough example to force a change of profession.

        1. How does this work? The way you describe it, your statues codify “might makes right” and any driver who risks a collision by violating right of way gets right of way.

      3. Don’t you live west of Arguello? How do you get anywhere without ramming people out of your way?

      4. The driver in the car in front is the one putting people’s lives at risk, don’t shift the responsibility.  Plus in the videos he rarely does more than dent their car.

  2. i have a fantasy thats kind of opposite where i wish i had the guts to slam my brakes every time someone tailgates me

    1. All I do is just ease off the gas until I’m doing about five miles an hour under the speed limit. They pull out and pass me.

      1. yeah ive done that, my crazy uncle once told me a story about how he threw a handfull of change out his window pelting the guy who was tail gating him

        my uncle does some crazy uncle stuff

        1. Yeah, if I were being particularly aggressive, I’d speed back up as they go to pass me. 

          I can’t say I’ve never done this. But I can say that it’s never a good idea.

          1. America! Where superficial damage to a piece of property is justification for the use of lethal force!

      2. Maybe you should take the hint that you’re in the wrong lane?  Lots of people try to avoid passing on the right, but that instantly runs into problems when you’re sitting in the far left lane fluctuating between the speed limit and 10 miles under.  If you’re causing a big backup and forcing people to pass you on the right then you’re just a jerk. 

        1. Despite your assumptions, I only *ever* use the left lane for passing. In california, however, that’s a convention that I seem to be lonely in following. On a typical 3-4 lane road, it’s often the case that the left lanes are no faster, and possibly slower than the right.

          Result: lots of right-passing and weaving. 

          I even do my best (sometimes by slowing, sometimes by speeding) to avoid creating a Pennsylvanian Roadblock, giving people room to maneuver between lanes. 

          So yeah, I get tailgaters coming up behind me while I’m in the far-right or middle-right lane because they’re busy trying to pass that doofus in the passing or express lane doing 65 instead of 80. Those are the ones for whom I have simply no sympathy. Yes, the person in the express lane shouldn’t be there, but No, that doesn’t give you justification for driving up behind me like a jerkwagon.

        2. I’ve been doing 80 on the midnight dead-as-a-ghost-town freeway and had people pull up behind me and tailgate. Sometimes people do it because they’re crazy or just assholes.

    2. You should hook up with Daneel.

      EDIT: Comment made sense when their comments were right next to each other.

    1. It looks like several of them intended to make an immediate right turn after cutting him off, but the collisions occurred before they could even lean to the right.

  3. I had a drivers education teacher, Mr. Lovercheck, who used to tell us that he drove a really crappy car with great breaks and tires. When he would see someone in a Mercedes or other expensive car breaking the law, (running red lights or stop signs he would just ram them. He knew they were at fault and they could just order another car, but he would teach them a lesson. 

    I think he was joking, but then again he was talking about a lot of the kid’s parents and eventually those kids. I think he wanted them to fear him. 

    When he was in the car driving with you he said that if he had to reach over an grab the steering wheel he would not hesitate to break your wrist if he had to to keep the car and him out of danger. He was quite the bad ass, in words. If he ever did that it would be interesting to know, but just telling us in advance he was going to do it was his way of immunizing himself and scaring the shit out of us.

    Then he showed “Blood on the Highway” and talked about DMV laws.

  4. Not so much fun for the occupants of the bus.  “-Oh no Alexei is at it again !” another 30 minutes of communting delay while medics pick up the remains of the punished drivers..

    1. I’d like to die like my old dad, peacefully in his sleep, not screaming and terrified, like his passengers.
       – Bob Monkhouse

    2. Did you watch ANY of the video at all? They’re all low-speed collisions with zero injuries and little worse than traded paint and bent bumpers.

      1. It’s already been established that those were bad drivers. Did you consider that a bad driver getting rear-ended by a bus might do something ill-advised or unpredictable, such as veering into opposing traffic?

          1. Some, many or all of them may be scammers causing accidents on purpose. It’s quite common in Russia. That’s why everyone has dash cams.

        1. Yes, because it’s so very common for drivers to veer wildly after they’ve been struck from behind instead of attempting to come to a stop, which is the natural impulse.

          Wait, no. The other thing. Practically unheard of. That’s it.

          To my knowledge, Alexei has inflicted zero injuries in over a hundred accidents. Clearly the man is not causing undue danger to people, or someone would have been hurt by now. And I can practically guarantee that there are about a hundred drivers out there who now know better than to dangerously pull in front of busses and slow down for absolutely no reason. That’s a net gain in my book.

          There are no medics picking up remains in this scenario, as the original commentator suggested. There are no cases of rear-ended drivers veering into opposing traffic in this scenario, as you suggested. Save your outrage and worry-warting for actual problems suggested by the evidence available concerning the story, not mere hypothetical what-ifs that occur to you in your bounding intuitive leaps.

          1. Clearly the man is not causing undue danger to people, or someone would have been hurt by now.

            Well that settles it. If no one has been seriously injured in the first few dozen collisions then no one will be, ever.

          2. Did you know that the vast majority of automobile accidents occur at low speeds and inflict no significant injuries?

            Hitting a stationary object or a stopped vehicle? That’ll hurt people.

            Hitting an oncoming vehicle? That’ll also hurt people.

            Hitting the rear of a vehicle which is traveling the same direction as you at nearly the same speed as you? Incredibly rare for someone to be hurt.

            Physics! It works!

          3. @eldrich:disqus 

            Did you know that the vast majority of automobile accidents occur at low speeds and inflict no significant injuries?

            You could say the same thing about the vast majority of bullets fired straight up into the air by drunken yokels. But some of them needlessly kill people, which is why you’re an idiot if you engage in that activity.

      2. Well, if someone has selected and edited together some low speed collisions then all the other impacts must surely be like that. You know, just like those compilation videos of smart bombs all unerringly hitting bad guys are representative of the totality.

        1. So you’re saying that my argument is bad because it’s based on all available information garnered from the news article in question, while your argument is good because it’s based on absolutely nothing and is hypothetical conjecture.

          Glad you cleared that up for me. I feel silly now.

          1. “Those people will be better drivers now, so the bus driver actually improved public safety by hitting them” is based purely on hypothetical conjecture.

  5. The only thing that will stop a bad driver who cuts cars off is a good driver who doesn’t slow down.

  6. That was actually pretty awesome.  A couple of them probably got him in trouble, but the most egregious one – the big van – was especially gratifying as he had pretty good evidence that it wasn’t his fault.

    (And yes, I think every driver “got what they deserved,” but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t likely to get in trouble.  In the US, or at least in Columbus, OH, he would be fired after just one such incident.)

    1. That’s because in the US, people are spineless cowards who can’t make reasonable judgements of contextually appropriate behavior. Everyone is trying to cover their own asses, so there’s no tolerance for the unexpected or the unconventional, even when it’s arguably the better or more effective option.

      In Russia, if it works, it works. Alexei’s refusal to back down in the face of idiocy might result in some minor trouble, but his supervisor probably loves him for it and manages to smooth things out in the end, because to my knowledge many Russians believe in taking responsibility for things and taking risks in the name of upholding principles.

      Alexei claims to have had over a hundred accidents like this. His employers clearly KNOW that he is actually a skilled, safe, reliable driver. Why fire him over trifling few fender benders that weren’t his fault to begin with? It’s clearly more valuable to keep him on, especially if he’s popular with the riders for this sort of behavior.

      1.  Yes, clearly, Americans not allowing extra-judicial punishment for rude driving makes them all spineless cowards.  That, or enough of us prefer not living in a vigilante state that it’s still frowned upon to be one.  But keep moving like Florida and we’ll be Russia in no time.

        While I enjoyed the video, I think I like America’s system better.  If anything, controlling your base instincts takes more of a spine than lashing out every time you are wronged.

        1. “Driving in a steady, predictable manner” is not “lashing out”.

          He’s not hunting these people down, he’s simply failing to protect them from the logical consequences of their actions.

          “Punishing people”, despite the lead, isn’t what he’s doing. He’s simply refusing to enable their bad behaviour.

          1. He is deliberately causing a collision that he could avoid.  Yes, the other party is in the wrong, but he absolutely could avoid it.  You could spend hours splitting semantic hairs about it but in the end that is arguing that someone fell into your clenched fist when you could have just as easily caught them with open arms.

          2. If I watch someone run by in a no running area, and trip over something they left in the way and know they should avoid, even if I could have moved it out of their way in time (especially if I’d be engaging in dangerous behaviour to others in the process), this is not an “extra-judicial punishment”.

            There’s no splitting hairs, here.

            God, is this really what America has come to, where no one is responsible for the logical consequences of their actions? No wonder American assholes’s are so bloody entitled, since apparently everyone else is expected to endanger themselves in order to protect them from their own dickish activity… (I assuming you’re arguing as an American here)

          3. GlyphGryph: (nesting is too deep so I can’t actually reply to your comment) Yes, you’re splitting hairs.Your example is false equivalency.  The only way it would be equivalent would be if YOU were the thing the people would trip over.  If you broke someone’s nose because you didn’t get yourself out of their way despite observing them and having the ability to safely remove yourself from their path then it’s equivalent.  This guy – through inaction – allowed others to come to harm.  He could have prevented said harm.Your second paragraph is standard hand wringing that’s better left unsaid.  Both sides of any debate could write jeremiads on how their opponent is an example of a failing of everything under the sun but it’s not useful and in fact shows you lack perspective and critical thinking on the issue.  Maybe I should throw in some slurs about a nationality I assume you to be but that’s not helpful, is it?Regardless, you say “no one is responsible for .. their actions?”  Hardly, I’m saying that both the drivers in an incident like these should be held responsible for their actions.  YOU are the one arguing against personal responsibility on the part of the bus driver.

          4.  And, as has been pointed out, what happens to his passengers if he slams on the brakes? I’ve owned a few big vehicles, some with airbrakes, which bring you to some serious stop if applied abruptly, which I’ve experienced in the driver’s seat with a 3-point harness. Still not nice, even at 20-30mph. Also, a rather splendid 4 1/4 ton vintage army truck, with, alarmingly, the same lockheed braking components as were used on the Mini. Cutting that thing up in a small car would have caused the death of the asshole driver more likely than not. The K9, and by extension, those inside it, would likely have been right as rain.

          5. He’s not hunting these people down, he’s simply failing to protect them from the logical consequences of their actions.

            And putting all the other innocent drivers around him (not to mention his passengers) in danger, but whatevs!

          6.  Except… he’s not. He’s improving safety for everyone, and for a situation like a bus, this is probably significantly safer than slamming on the breaks, especially in what looks to be fairly frequent inclement conditions.

            He’s not putting any driver at risk. The driver in front of him is certainly putting /himself/ at risk. He’s just acting responsibly.

          7. The passengers in that taxi obviously had it coming. I bet they didn’t even do a background check on their driver before getting in the cab.

          8.  He’s improving safety for everyone

            Well there you have it…..haha

            Uh, there are ones where rear ending the other drivers seemed unavoidable so fair dues to him there, others where he appears to have deliberately let it happen or even sped up…..

      2. That’s because in the US, people are spineless cowards who can’t make reasonable judgements of contextually appropriate behavior. Everyone is trying to cover their own asses, so there’s no tolerance for the unexpected or the unconventional, even when it’s arguably the better or more effective option.

        Hmmmm….”spineless”, worse, and more likely to arrive at our destination alive. Maybe we should be wimpier and we can get our death rate down as low as Canada’s?

        1.  Awesome, exactly.  I can enjoy this video, recognize that the other drivers are horrible drivers, but also see that what the bus driver is doing is wrong and dangerous.  He’s a terrible driver in his own right.

          Every day I avoid at least one collision.  But, since today I learned that every mistake should instead lead to personal financial tragedy and potential injury, I know I should have been hitting them instead.

          1. Except absolutely none of the events in the article led to “personal financial tragedy” or injury of any kind. Exagerate and generalize more, please.

            Oh, and if you’re going to get so worked up over “potential” injury, you should stop driving altogether, since it’s one of the activities most likely to result in your death.

            I don’t care if you’re driving some huge like a city bus or something tiny like a Peel P50, you’re not going to total any vehicle or cause any significant damage or injuries by rear ending another vehicle traveling the same direction as you below highway speeds. There’s simply not enough force involved with such a slight difference of velocities.

  7. It’s hard to judge distance in the video but it looks like the drivers doing the cutting off are the notorious Russian scammers who are trying to cause accidents.  Why else would, without signalling, anyone cut immediately in front of a large vehicle and suddenly slow down?

    1. Srsly? I’ll see someone a block away waiting to turn into my lane. They’ll wait until I’m almost on top of them, pull out in front of me and then go ten miles under the speed limit. It happens all the time.

    2. “”Why else would, without signalling, anyone cut immediately in front of a large vehicle and suddenly slow down?””

      People are idiots and if we’re going to save lives we need to develop self driving cars.

  8. The guy makes me really miss my old ’68 F250 Camper Special with the drum brakes and plausible deniability.  Inertia was my friend, and the foe of asshole drivers.

    1. Accident actually implies a lack of intent. I doubt the instigating drivers intended to cause these collisions. Most likely they merely intended to bully the bus into slowing down for no reason with their pointlessly aggresive driving.

    2. To rear-end one asshole may be regarded as a misfortune; to rear-end a hundred looks like YouTube ad revenue.

      1. A misfortune for who? The asshole? Because a city bus isn’t going to suffer any appreciable damage at those speeds and in that type of a collision. Scratched paint and bent fender, tops.

  9. Jesus what an asshat.

    Sometimes people make mistakes. Big fucking deal! You don’t have to cause thousands in damage for them.

    90% of drivers think they’re better drivers than average. I make mistakes, but so do you. Road rage is a silly thing.

    1. I’d hardly call this road rage. It’s not like he’s 1) angry or 2) acting on that anger. He’s not chasing down and harassing other drivers. He’s not driving aggresively. He’s not doing ANYTHING, in fact. He’s acting as a passive party, driving in a steady predictable manner. He’s no more to blame for these accidents than a tree or a building is for being slammed into by a motorist that misjudged.

      1. As a sentient creature, he has the ability to hit the brakes if he chooses, unlike a tree or a building. I think he’s a jackass. 

        1. There may be disagreement about whether the bus driver is a jackass. But can we all agree that the OTHER drivers in this video are jackasses?

          There’s making a mistake, and then there’s reckless disregard for safety that puts yourselves and others at risk… I’m pretty sure racing to cut off a bus and then hitting the breaks is a bit more than a “mistake”…

          1. I don’t see any disagreement with that part. Jackassery abounds in the video.

            But a truly good driver isn’t someone who merely doesn’t cause collisions, it’s one who actively avoids them.

        2. Maybe he grew tired of slamming on his brakes and face-planting his passengers into the backs of seats.

          1. There’s a difference between “not slamming the brakes hard enough to face-plant your passengers” and “not taking your foot off the accelerator.”

        3. Letting people suffer the negative consequences of their actions makes one an asshole?

          So, what, you’re the kind of person who won’t let a kid try to put a penny in an electrical socket?

          Just let people learn the proper way – by making a mistake and suffering the consequences. With the kid and the electric socket, they got harmlessly shocked and learn to never do it again. With the idiot driver, they get a bend fender and some scratched paint, and never do it again.

          Save your concern and outrage for actual problems and significant dangers.

          1. With the kid and the electric socket, they got harmlessly shocked and learn to never do it again.

            Or they were maimed or killed. Still, lesson learned!

    2.  Agreed, this guy is a complete bag. Part of driving is merging which requires non-asshole drivers on both sides.

      1. This is worth noting as drivers can be aggressive on both sides of this situation. F/e aggressively not letting somebody merge into your lane.

        1. The only way to aggressively not let somebody merge is to actively accelerate or decelerate to block or impede their travel path. The bus driver did no such thing, and consequently cannot be said to have been driving aggressively.

          1. No way of knowing if the bus driver actively accelerated or decelerated?  Perhaps you need to watch the video again.

  10. I’m sure local laws differ, but I’m betting Alexi knows them far better than the people he’s hitting.  In each case, he’s hitting a car BEFORE it’s fully in his lane and/or their brake lights are on when they enter the frame.

    Unlike rear-ending someone ALREADY in your lane, (which would be a failure to maintain safe distance fault on the rear car), in Georgia, at least, there is usually a presumption that the driver making the lane change is the at-fault driver.

    Good reason to get a dash camera.  And if it shows you at fault, you just don’t use the video.

    1.  I was going to say, at least a few of these looked more like drivers turning into him, rather than simply cutting him off.

      1.  +1000 for “The Punisher”. Assuming he’s not speeding up to hit them as they try to cut him off, most of these do appear to be poorly timed and executed lane changes.

      1. Never!  Unless it was the 1950-1955 station wagon version, then I’d run it over with no hesitation.

  11. One day, he’ll do that to the wrong crazy russian and end up with a gun to the face for his trouble.

  12. Seem like a lot of instances of people pulling right in front of the bus and slowing down at distances where a heavy vehicle like a bus (with its longer stopping distances) wouldn’t be in the best position to respond well.  I knew someone who drove a double-decker bus in London, and she said she was in quite a few accidents with cars that failed to take that into account.  Or, as I believe she put it, “they failed to understand that they needed to get out of my way.”

    1. Quite a few people have found out the hard way that the trolley in San Francisco stops for no-one. 

      (It’s also the true & final boss in GTA:SA)

      1. On the contrary – the trolley in San Fierro is the player’s best and truest ally!  You can perpetually fend off the police by simply nestling one’s motorbike up parallel to it and watching the hilarity as road-blocking police cruisers and vans get swatted out of the way, exploding, as the trolley drives through them.

        1. If I had that game as a kid (pre-internet) there would of been so many rumors about stopping the trolley and finding wondrous things inside.

          Although that game came out to a mature internet and there were strange rumors anyways.

  13. These comments are all the same.  “You can’t get away with that here because of the law”.  No you can’t get away with it here because the driver in the rear is automatically assumed to be at fault for the accident.
    When dash cams evidence is accepted in court, I’ll applaud this activity all day long.
    In conclusion, the enemy of my enemy is my friend, therefore, please continue punishing assholes, bus driver!. 

    1. Why would civilian dashcam footage be inadmissible in court? It’s certainly admissible to your insurance company.

  14. Once, when i was a teen, i considered jamming on my brakes and letting a crazy-overaggressive driver rear-end my beat up Volvo. But common sense prevailed by a hair. As i let the car pass me at 75 MPH, i glanced over. The fat pig of a woman driving was totally oblivious. ALL the car windows were down and there were 6 small kids all standing up in their seats dancing around, (2 in front, 4 in back. I still sometimes imagine the car crunching into my bumper,  launching those kids onto the blacktop, under the wheels of highway traffic. (This was pre-cell phone btw so i couldn’t conveniently report her driving.) I also wonder whether they were all her kin, or if she maybe was delivering other people’s kids to/from preschool.

    1. Buses get terrible mileage. Go for some something hefty, but somewhat efficienct, like a van, or a pickup truck.

    2. How about a Russian reboot of the Partridge Family in which they ram other drivers with their bus on the way to gigs and then finish each episode with an upbeat song?

  15. Something that all these American Boing Boing commenters don’t seem to realize is that these people are causing accidents on purpose.  All the bus driver is doing is film them.  In American English it is called the “swoop and squat.”  It is a standard way to scam insurance companies.  In Russia it is a regular folk industry.  These people are trying to scam the bus company, and this driver isn’t putting up with it.

    Several people here mention that the bus did not slow down or back off fast enough to avoid an accident.  Guess what?  Even if he knocks passengers onto the floor with a panic stop he still cannot stop faster than some crappy little Lada or whatever those things are.  They are willfully trying to hit him and he can’t really avoid it.

    1. The Russian-language mass media also mentions that Volkov was deemed not at fault in all of the incidents he’s been involved in. Whether this is due to actual legislation or his popularity (Russian highway patrol is notoriously corrupt and wouldn’t be too stuck on the rules) is left as an exercise for the reader.

  16. I have attached a train cow catcher plow to the front of my 33′ schoolbus.
    No, not really, I try to behave in a sociable manner-makes life better for everyone-so does removing your ego from things-geez!
    In Japan when someone enters your lane they signal thank you with hazard lights, though they also merge at 130km/h with only small gap.

  17. I find it funny how every driver that steps out of the car throws their hands up in the air like “WTF did YOU do?” 

    The bus driver is still an ahole though. During the last collision with the truck with topper on it, he clearly speeds up to ram the truck. If you listen, you can hear 1) the sound of the bus revving up 2) a puppy squeal with pain during impact.  If you cover the truck with your hand and focus on the stop light or trees, you can see the bus driver rapidly goes from approx 10mph to 30 mph after the truck moves in front of him. 

  18. houston bus drivers are pretty dominant downtown. i’ve never seen one hit anyone but they will take any opportunity to get that bus moving even if it means cutting you off.

Comments are closed.