Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: beezdotcom
"Does that give you the right to kill someone else by negligently swerving into someone else's lane"?

No, but that's a moot point, because the odds are very good that I wouldn't be found negligent in the situation I described.

Actually you are very wrong. If you caused the collision, you caused the collision, regardless if you feel you were negligent or not. The party that sustains damages or injuries is not going to care what the reason was for running into them. If you cause a collision, and are found to be the cause, you will be at fault, you and your insurance company will be found liable. Now if you swerved to avoid hitting a cow and changed lanes causing an accident, you will be found liable, for damages or injuries, however, you can try to go after who ever owned the cow for failing to secure their animal. Believe it or not, if you swerved to avoid hitting a child in a crosswalk, and caused an accident with another vehicle, you again would be found liable for damages.

115 posted on 05/26/2005 12:42:34 PM PDT by Black Tooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies ]


To: Black Tooth
Actually you are very wrong. If you caused the collision, you caused the collision, regardless if you feel you were negligent or not. The party that sustains damages or injuries is not going to care what the reason was for running into them.

Re-read. Catch up. There's a big difference between "being liable" and being "criminally negligent". It's the "criminal negligence" part of the arguments that I'm not buying - you know, the part that can result in jail time.
122 posted on 05/26/2005 12:51:38 PM PDT by beezdotcom (I'm usually either right or wrong...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 115 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson