Is the car supposed to protect you from all potential damage, or does the driver take responsibility to ensure that they don't crash into stationary ambulances?
This just reminds me of the Jury verdict against Ford for the girl that was thrown out of the passenger window of an explorer. She wasn't wearing her seatbelt and the jury decided that the window should have been able to keep her in the vehicle. I suppose we would all be satisfied with windows that didn't roll down.
Is everyone ready for their seatbelts to attach to the underside of the seat, between their legs?
Sometimes stuff happens and it is just plain bad luck.
Don't get me wrong, I blame the driver (who fell asleep). I wouldn't have voted for any damages, but I can understand how a jury got talked into it.
Or how about the verdict against Ford for the Bronco II which was dangerous because the driver was paralyzed in a rollover.... After he got behind the wheel drunk, didn't wear a seatbelt, and fell asleep behind the wheel (so the vehicle went off the road, ejected him and then rolled over top of him)...
Or there's the girl who was killed in a mid-80s escort that didn't have airbags, and her parents sued saying they should have been standard equipment, and she would have survived with them. They got a fat award, even though the escort was one of the few vehicles available with airbags as an option back then, and they chose not to buy them....
Or how about the lawsuit in Texas, where someone left their kid in the car out in the sun, and then sued Ford after the child baked to death, saying that there should be a standard cooling system built into the car to cool off the interior when its parked in the sun so those things don't happen..
These lawsuits are out of control, and have been for some time...