Report a Comment

I think you finally get the point. Most people here think that it is unfair that killing a pedestrian has pretty much no penalty. I would say "justice is not served". Others might simply not be able to believe that there are no laws on the books to slap these killers with. Clearly, the law is full of driver-bias.

@ Jamie: If you wanna put it in black-and-white terms, yes that's what is boils down to. However, most folks here see the world in shades of gray, which leads to a lot of subtlety, which is hard for some to follow.

A lot of people would for starters object to the word accident. The question is in most cases, whether you should hold someone responsible for the action of willfully (or neglectfully) not paying enough attention to the situation on the road.

When people bump in to each other on the sidewalk, most would say sorry and admit they weren't paying (enough) attention. That's fine and the consequences are usually minor.

Oddly, this behavior of taking responsibility for one's actions seems to become impossible when "bumping" into someone while surrounded by a ton of steel and moving around a much higher speed with much higher consequences. In fact, a few examples are given where the crasher demands damages from the crashee. Why is that exactly?

by Jasper on Mar 31, 2010 10:06 am • link • report