What, Communist kisses aren't persuasive?
Seriously, I guess that site doesn't like its pix being linked.
At any rate, it's pix of a deer going through the windshield into the driver's seat.
Here's another try at ONE of 'em from a different source:
Posted on 05/26/2005 9:09:09 AM PDT by m1-lightning
Make sure you invite them to my BBQ.
Seriesly, this thread is a good example of the fact that our society has spent so much time demonizing DUI drivers that now society accepts all other manners of dangerous drivers. Bad driving is a choice and all damage caused to other people/property needs to be treated equally under the law. Maybe then, people will take driving seriously and the risk to innocent bystanders will be minimized.
How are two red x's supposed to convince me? ;-)
Don't get me started on Pitbulls. Check my profile.
There is no negligence in split second reactions. Situations on the road change rapidly. Instinct has the biggest influence on your reaction. It is instict to avoid a deer. When you have to go into a thought process of deciding which way to turn to avoid the deer, then it takes too much time to do so thus it becomes an accident. Accidents are unintended. I doubt any one who swerves to miss a deer intends to hit a car instead.
No it's not. If someone runs a red light and kills you walking through a cross walk, they are liable, both criminally and in civil court. One is expected to operate a motor vehicle safely. This case was slightly different, they were in a parking lot, not a public street. Even though she was not licensed or permitted, he did use a bit of common sense to take her to a parking lot, that was hopefully empty during off hours. It was clearly a freakish accident, but the father is still liable. I don't think jail time is warranted for the Dad, but a long probation, big fines and restitution for the family for the loss of their mother are in order.
You know what I meant ;)
Because they have failed to use their noggin to think such scenarios thru ahead of time. They have become lazy drivers that think it is just as natural and comfortable as walking. They have forgotten the inherent risks associated and the amount of responsibility they carry when driving. Our laws and society has allowed it to happen.
Kewl pic. I don't see any blood on the driver seat so I am assuming he/she survived. I wonder about the passenger. It still wouldn't be prudent to swerve into the other lane on a busy road to avoid that deer.
Many accidents are caused by negligence. There are millions of accident scenarios and it is impossible to think of all of them.
No law or society can prevent accidents. To think so is negligence in itself.
Untrue.
Actually it's ture. The huge majority of vehicle accidents just don't happen. They is a cause. An accident would be lightening hitting the driver causing a collision. Or a defective wheel falling off of a vehicle. 99.99 percent of all collisions are not accidents, and most are caused by careless drivers.
Ops, I mis read your post. You are correct.
Yes, rarely there is a true accident that would warrant no punishment. However, in the scheme of things these are a very small portion of car crashes causing damage or death. Take a look at your news and watch how many crazy "accidents" go unprosecuted and you'll get a feel for where I'm coming from.
A couple of times a week in my area we get crazy stories like a lady driving on the sidewalk because she was having a bad day, a driver falling asleep and slamming into a police car, etc. These accidents go unprosecuted. Why? Are they not caused by negligence? Well, yes they are, but they don't involve alcohol so they are just normal "accidents."
Hitting a deer would be one of the rare accidents. Some weather conditions would also warrant being classified as accidents.
If prosecution of negligence was more aggressive, my bet is that insurance rates would go down.
Here your are incorrect. Just because you swerve to avoid a deer, a pothole, or a trashcan or debris in the road, does not give you the right to run into anyone else. You will be liable.
Last year near Peoria, IL, a driver hit a deer and sent it airborne into oncoming traffic. The deer decapitated the driver of the oncoming vehicle.
Read my #94.
Absolutely. A tiny fraction are caused by true accidents, like a driver having a heart attack, causing a collision. However, his insurance company will no doubt be sued for damages.
It's not a "right", it's a reaction. And yes, by law, it's legal to cause an accident by avoiding another accident. There is a lot of negligence out there but taking it to the point of "everyone is liable for mistakes" is taking this society into a liberal sue-happy future. People should not have to be paranoid of lawsuits and prison time while driving because paranoyia can cause an accident too. Drive at your own risk, but yes, there are many situations where negligence applies.
Uncle JimBo and Ned are the gun-toting Bubba types; when they take the kids on a camping trip, they get drunk and shoot at will. JimBo's philosophies are, "hunting without drinking is like fishing," and "thanks to those damned Democrats, we can only shoot certain animals that impose a threat; therefore, when you see an animal, you have to yell, 'it's comin' right for us'; then you shoot"
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.