Posted on 05/26/2005 9:09:09 AM PDT by m1-lightning
That was just an example. Here is another example, if a kid runs out in front of you, and there is no crosswalk, and you change lanes to avoid the kid, causing damage or injuries to someone else, you will be liable. If a dog runs out in front of you, and you cause damages or injuries to someone else in an effort to avoid the dog, you again will be liable.
Not a true statement. It's not always one of the drivers being negligent. Remember the Firestone Tire fiasco with all the SUV roll-overs?
Yes it was a true statement. He said "someone". In this case that someone would be the manufacturer was found negligent and liable.
And at the most, drunk driver's should lose their license and pay fines to cover the paperwork regardless if someone is killed or not. Prison is for criminals and criminals intend to commit crimes. Hell, if they can let a child sex offender out early based on rehabilitation then it certainly shouldn't require prison for a traffic violator to be rehabilitated. Suspend the license until they learn their lesson. Strict penalties belong to severe criminals. 12 years is a strict penalty. Being coherent also requires paying attention and being prepared for adverse actions by outside influences.
That's why cell phones and easting/drinking should be prohibited while a vehicle is in motion. Pull the car over and stuff the burger or wait until you get to your destination. I totally agree that all of that is negligence.
Bingo. There is no such thing as an accident when it comes to a motor vehicle collision with another vehicle, or a pedestrian.
These idiots need to pay for what they did. If the prosecutor wants to send a message, I say let him.
People like these two make me afraid to hop on my motorcycle every day, let alone walk on a sidewalk.
Not likely knowing they have to prove that you had other options besides swerving. If anyone would be liable it would be the parents of the child and even then, it wouldn't be likely that they be charged. Many typed of these accidents go unprosecuted simply because they are indeed accidents. The prosecution has to prove neglect ad often they can't.
I must apologize. I am guilty of calling someone an idiot on a thread about Pitbulls. He was bashing them without researching the subject. That's not an excuse, just an explanation.
But you're right. We (or at least some of us) need to take our posts up a notch on the civility scale when posting to threads. If someone feels they need to get hateful, they should probably use FReepmail where the parties can argue in private. Also, with FReepmail it's easy to ignore someone with whom you don't want to converse.
An accident would be getting hit by lightening, or a tree falling onto your car, causing your car to be sent our of control, a driver having a heart attack etc. These scenarios rarely occur, but even so, damages or injuries caused to others will become a liability to their insurance companies.
These idiots need to pay for what they did. If the prosecutor wants to send a message, I say let him.
This case in the article was a freak thing. The Dad used a bit of common sense here by taking her to a parking lot, hopefully an empty parking lot during off hours. Things went very bad, in this case, and he will probably get hit with a long probation, nasty fines and restitution to the family for the loss of their Mom. This was just a sad event, as many out there have done the same thing with their kids, in hopes of training them. Just a sad story, but the old man will still be liable.
So you say all collisions are intended? That would be the opposite of an accident. In your absolutism, there would be no such thing as accidents anyway. People are the cause of everything that happens, therefore in your logic, there are no accidents and anyone and everyone who gets injured or killed is because of negligence. That's a nice way of thinking... for a tort lawyer.
You cannot avoid a crash and cause a crash.
For your example, the one that swerved to avoid and deer and crashed into another vehicle is at fault.
True...Firestone was found negligent in court cases, you proved my point here. It didn't help matters for inexperienced drivers.
Not likely knowing they have to prove that you had other options besides swerving. If anyone would be liable it would be the parents of the child and even then
They don't have to prove anything, other than finding you at fault for causing injury or damages to others.
You could try and go after the parents of the kid in question, thats always an option, but the insurance company of the party you caused damages to will go after you. You can try to get relief from the parents of the kid, that would be another story.
Thanks, I have been out of the office for a few hours.
"and he not only failed to do that, he deliberately did so in a place where there were innocent people around."
Deliberately? get real. This was an accident. They happen.
No problem. I honestly understand some of these people not thinking they may be at fault. But in most all of these instances or scenarios brought up, they would clearly be at fault.
...where a hunter came out of the woods and you accidently hit him. Now your dad is going to prison for 12 years.
At that point, circumstantial evidence will play into the trial, which is my point.
Do you have the actual text of the law? Is she actually charged with operating a vehicle without a license? I see where the father is faulted for not obtaining a learners permit but I don't see the charge listed for her. In TN a license is required to operate a motor vehicle on public streets. There are children all over the state operating vehicles on public lands and private property but it is not against the law. If they are on the streets it is another matter entirely.
And all the pitbulls I know were gentle dogs but then again almost anything remotely pitbull in the inner city is inbred to the point of insanity.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.