- Joined
- Jun 10, 2026
- Messages
- 22
- Your ID
- 1737
- Admin's Name
- Ibrahim Shiekh
- Date of violation
- Aug 19, 2026
- Time of violation
- 15:41
Please watch the video, and explain how this wasn't intentional? Ballas are well known for car ramming.
"After reviewing the provided POV, I could not confirm any Car Ramming by ID 1663. The vehicle collisions appeared to be part of the attempt to pull you over and were not intentional repeated hits.
Therefore, Rule 5.20 cannot be applied in this situation, as there is insufficient evidence to establish intentional Car Ramming."
The reasoning for rejection above doesn't make much sense. First off I reported 3 ID's, which were all involved in hitting my car at one point or another. You even said "vehicle collisions", confirming there was repeated hits, contradicting what you say right after that. To anyone with a little common sense, it's obvious that the ramming was on purpose, and calling them "collisions" to try and say they're mutual, is just delusional. It doesn't matter if it was "part of the attempt to pull me over", you're just making up rules as you go to protect them in this instance. They are not LEO's that can pit. They are not supposed to hit my car even while attempting to pull me over. If I hadn't of been spun out on the bridge, I wouldn't of had my back tire shot out, which could've changed the outcome of the situation.
"After reviewing the provided POV, I could not confirm any Car Ramming by ID 1663. The vehicle collisions appeared to be part of the attempt to pull you over and were not intentional repeated hits.
Therefore, Rule 5.20 cannot be applied in this situation, as there is insufficient evidence to establish intentional Car Ramming."
The reasoning for rejection above doesn't make much sense. First off I reported 3 ID's, which were all involved in hitting my car at one point or another. You even said "vehicle collisions", confirming there was repeated hits, contradicting what you say right after that. To anyone with a little common sense, it's obvious that the ramming was on purpose, and calling them "collisions" to try and say they're mutual, is just delusional. It doesn't matter if it was "part of the attempt to pull me over", you're just making up rules as you go to protect them in this instance. They are not LEO's that can pit. They are not supposed to hit my car even while attempting to pull me over. If I hadn't of been spun out on the bridge, I wouldn't of had my back tire shot out, which could've changed the outcome of the situation.