if you were in a car and had an accident with him, even if it was clearly and obviously his fault, but he got rather hurt?

I'm not sure what you mean by "an argument" but if he was at fault then his insurance company would be responsible for your damages.

I don't know, but one thing I do know. If you give a motorcycle chick beads, she'll flash you her boobies.

an argument: "THIS WAS YOUR FAULT!"

If you are that concerned about fault when a rider is injured I never want to meet you on the road.

Also, I don't think you have much to worry about, out of all the cases I've seen, the motorcyclist is always blamed, and if they don't have proof ends up having to suffer for it. I saw a video once of an accident that had just happened. The motorcyclist was in the middle lane, and the retard (yes retard) in the left lane slammed the brakes and locked up his tires for no reason at all (none visible in the video and the guy never gave a good reason afterward). He then swerved out of control in heavy traffic right into the motorcyclists lane and took her out. She had no where to go except into the side of the car and she went over the hood as the guy was at a 90 in the road skidding sideways.

So of course, she bit it pretty hard and her bike was totaled. The guy walks out of his car, checks his phone, and then checks the damage on his car. A little while later he walks over to the motorcyclist and asks if she is ok. (everything was caught on a video camera she just got for Christmas) The police arrived and asked what happened of course the guy driving the car said he wasn't at fault and that she drove into the side of him. Of course, the police figure that all motorcyclists are crazy and gave her a ticket. If it wasn't for the video she would have not only lost her bike but had to pay a rather large fine.

Out of all my driving, the people in the cages are the mindless drivers who don't look over their shoulders and wipe out the riders. I've had more close calls than I can shake a stick at, and every single one was because a cager doesn't look, or is busy doing something besides driving. Yes, I've seen motorcyclists do stupid things and I've had my fair share of accidents, but your concern as a driver should be for the safety of the riders, not if they were the ones who caused the accident, you can always settle that days or weeks later and you don't have to do it in person either as the insurance companies will handle it for you.

^ my concern is like this:

i was making a right turn into a gas station. signalled all they way from 100 meters back or so. i stopped before pulling into the station, then proceeded when i saw nothing was on my side mirror.

then this dumb ass slides himself between me and the station at like 60 mph, and of course i happen to hit him. at this time, he has the gall to threaten legal action.

i'm not concerned about blame. my question is, can you really tell a motorcycle driver he was wrong if he happens to get hurt over his own stupidity?

I cannot speak for the competency of law enforcement in all places, but from my experience the severity of injuries is irrelevant to the investigation. There is no deep rooted desire to side with the party that is most injured. In fact injure them badly enough, and the police must accept you story granted that the physical evidence does not contradict your testimony. Dead men tell no tales.

Absolutely you can win a argument skid marks, right of way, and account consistency determine almost ninety percent of auto mobile accidents. In other words if you were going down the road at a speed limit of 100kmh, and a bike at a mandatory stop just jumps out in front of you doing 20kmh, and you rear end the bastard you have ample evidence for your case. Your going to have your skid marks which will tell the authorities your speed, and they are going to tell them where you braked. Then your going to have the distance you pitched him. Which is the culmination of both his speed and your speed. Then your also going to have the benefit of your story being far more rational.

The reality about forensic evidence is it really can't be twisted. Physics and math do not lie. They are undeniable. So as long as the evidence is with you. You should win your case handily.

Having know of enough cases of motorcycle riders going 1.5 to 2 times the speed limit on a road while weaving in and out of traffic and being involved in an accident I can understand why there is the assumption of fault ... One of the first things I was taught in driving school was that the number of bad drivers on the road at any given time greatly outnumbered the number of good drivers, and it was important to drive defensively; which is something I have never seen a crotch-rocket rider do (I have seen some older guys on Harleys drive well though).

You're correct though, the primary thing in an accident (regardless of who it is with) is to check to see if someone is injured and to get them medical attention. I'm not sure what the laws are everywhere but if there is enough damage to the vehicles, or if someone is injured, you typically need to contact the police and they will typically determine who was at fault.

^ the problem i have is that this guy was hurt, was mad as hell, and he threatened me. i did go and make sure he was all right, but he wouldn't hear any of it. there was really no way to see this as being my fault, as all the gas station employees could attest to. in fact, in the end, the police left due to my request, as they determined that the guy was only moaning and groaning at his own stupidity, and i even paid him so he could get an xray on his leg.

Look if you're willing to drive a motorcycle, you should know how dangerous it is, and how you're likely to get hurt even in the smallest of accidents.