The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
Teenagers can't drice cars. FACT.
Women can't drive cars. FACT.
Teenagers + women = CRASH FOR SURE. mot.
In da butt.
"Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
"God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.
Seriously though, I admit that of course I can't be an experienced driver at the age of 18 - but everyone starts from zero, no? I do not find hiking the limit to, say, 21 objectionable, though, however I think the young drivers who are reckless at 18 will continue to be so at 21. Alcohol + testosterone + high speeds = bad. My primary occupation behind the wheel is driving my mother from work and back, not zooming around the city in search of vastly younger females to have indecent relations with.
Cake and grief counseling will be available at the conclusion of the test. Thank you for helping us help you help us all!
Errr actually it is true in like 98% of cases. The best
result I have ever seen for the guy in the back car is some element of contributory negligence for the stopped car (failure to pull over or to take measures when there was time to do so or a sudden stop for no reason)
The overriding premise in all the decisions was that a driver was responsible to be able to stop and should drive safely considering all the conditions.
The insurance "liability chart" gives 100% liability to kuci in these facts. If there is only property damage it would cost him more then the damages to fight that finding . I know that the among lawyers, a rear-ender is considered a "liability is not in question' type case. It requires something unusual to take it out of that realm.
You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Wait a minute, why do you need to take a highway to get to school anyway?
Visit First Cultural Industries There are reasons why I believe mankind should live in cities and let nature reclaim all the villages with the exception of a few we keep on display as horrific reminders of rural life.-Starchild Meat eating and the dominance and force projected over animals that is acompanies it is a gateway or parallel to other prejudiced beliefs such as classism, misogyny, and even racism. -General Ludd
Kassi, sure. I think 18 is good though.. it's a great age to start driving.. 16 is a little bit Hmm, 21 is way too late.. 18 is good I think. I've been in the traffic since I was 16, with a motorcycle as you know is the age limit 16, which in a way is not logical because even younger people plus fast bikes equals NEGAHHHHHHH NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!! Then again, if you survive, you have ltos of experience when you get a car. What young folks usually lack is the eye. They think they're alone in the traffic you know.. thinking if they don't screw up, then they won't crash.. but other people can screw up too and crash on you. Plus young inexperienced drivers also sometimes don't realize the good speed to drive on certain situations and places, come too fast and loose control. They also loose that control over the vehicle sometimes easier, getting more brainfarts.
But other than that, no problem.. on the other hand, they' just been in the driving school so they are more careful, they prolly know the rules better than middle aged folks and you know, it's not a recipie for disaster. Add women and then you have doom.
In da butt.
"Do not worry if others do not understand you. Instead worry if you do not understand others." - Confucius
THE UNDEFEATED SUPERCITIZEN w:4 t:2 l:1 (DON'T ASK!)
"God is dead" - Nietzsche. "Nietzsche is dead" - God.
Errr actually it is true in like 98% of cases. The best
result I have ever seen for the guy in the back car is some element of contributory negligence for the stopped car (failure to pull over or to take measures when there was time to do so or a sudden stop for no reason)
The overriding premise in all the decisions was that a driver was responsible to be able to stop and should drive safely considering all the conditions.
The insurance "liability chart" gives 100% liability to kuci in these facts. If there is only property damage it would cost him more then the damages to fight that finding . I know that the among lawyers, a rear-ender is considered a "liability is not in question' type case. It requires something unusual to take it out of that realm.
You went from 100% (original post) down to 98% in the prior post.
I will grant that it is difficult to defend but not impossible. I have clients in this position and can provide case law if you wish.
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain
What can you do though if your insurance company won't fight it?
What State are you in? You need to find out how the insurance scheme works in your jurisdiction.
As the law applies here, the onus is on you to fight any charge that may be laid. If the charge is withdrawn or the case dismissed (acquitted) an insurance penalty will not apply, although a claim for damages (ie to fix your car) will almost certainly raise your premiums.
We work under "no fault" insurance in Ontario so your situation may be quite different.
Were any charges laid?
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain
Main thing is your ok, God, I hate it when that happens. Same happened to me about 2 months ago, doing 80 down the M4 (yehh, 70 is the limit) when all the traffic in the right hand side slammed the breaks on. I hit my breaks, and the car seemed to skate .. I could see I wasn't going to make it, like in slow motion.. I hit the 4x4 infront, so we pulled up, took a look, not a single scratch or dent on me or his car !!
In my case, I didn't leave a big enough gap for myself (not easy on the M4 whenever you do, somebody will fill it, even if its 1.1 car length only), but I can see a hill must have made it a real pig for you to react to it .. Just hope she doesn't sue.
"Wherever wood floats, you will find the British" . Napoleon
You went from 100% (original post) down to 98% in the prior post.
I will grant that it is difficult to defend but not impossible. I have clients in this position and can provide case law if you wish.
If you want to get really technical, the 100% is likely true-- I don't know of any rear-ender cases where the back car didn't have some fault apportioned to them-- Do you have case law where the back car was 0% at fault -- and I'm not talking about if someone backs up into you or if you are the middle car after getting hit yourself
You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Originally posted by The Viceroy
... doing 80 down the M4 (yehh, 70 is the limit) ...
I assume you mean Kph?
Wouldn't walking be a little faster?
"I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." - Clarence Darrow
"I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it." - Mark Twain
Comment