I believe it's their legal responsibility to be able to slow down or stop to avoid obstacles on the road.
I'm not suggestion that they needed to have perfect precision.
I'm suggesting that they should to be able to meet the minimum requirements under the laws under which we all drive.
However, if they failed to meet those minimum requirements, which we all do from time to time, that they should at least been able to slow down enough to make this a minor accident with minor damage and maintain reasonable control of their vehicle.
I'm not pulling these concepts out of nowhere. These are the traffic laws we all supposed to abide by.
If we fail to abide by them, we bear some responsibility in the results.
perhaps, but for the actions of the two jv's an accident wouldn't have occurred.
I can see what you're getting at, but I'm going to have to say you've got the wrong end of the stick here. The judge apparently agrees with me, because he found these two guilty in this case. This particular (fake) deer in the middle of the road was only there because these two idiots decided to put it there. If they had thought about it at all, what did they think would be the result of this? In fact, there's good reason to believe they thought it would result in some type of accident, which apparently they thought would be entertaining. Same kind of moronic mentality as punks dropping rocks off overpasses just to see what would happen. I did a lot of stupid things in my youth, but even at my most booze and testosterone addled worst I never would have considered doing something so stupid.
The only real issue up for debate here is whether or not their sentences should have been delayed until after the football season. My instinct is to say no, they shouldn't have been.