So pedestrians are not responsible for their own actions? The nanny state must take care of them 24/7?
Last I looked, it was pretty stupid to wonder out into the road.
Pedestrians in the UK most certainly are responsible for their own actions, and have a legal duty of care to other road users. But many rural roads in the UK have no sidewalk, and drivers must always be prepared to encounter pedestrians there: while in towns there are many deaths and injuries caused by incompetent or drunk drivers mounting the sidewalk, driving across ‘zebra’ crossings (where there’s a legal obligation to stop for pedestrians) etc. There’s no way in which drivers can avoid responsibility for their conduct of a potentially lethal instrument (the car), or the effects of that instrument when in contact with a vulnerable legitimate road user. To claim otherwise is a ‘might is right’ argument of the most egregious kind.
cyclotic - you gave the example of your son hitting a deer.
Now if that had been a pedestrian - at 70 mph, the person would have been killed no matter what.
But if, assume, your son had been driving at 30 mph in a built-up area and hit a jaywalker. Your son committed no crime, but he would still be heartbroken that he hurt someone — even if it was completely the other person’s fault.
Most US driving is on highways - except in the North-east. In the UK, it is different - most driving is in heavily built-up areas.
Different conditions.
In the case of the UK - say your son is driving down a road in London and hits a pedestrian. Even if it is 100% the pedestrian’s fault, I’m sure your son will be relieved that he would not kill someone.
The Pedestrian would still have erred, no doubt.
The car in the UK should save the passengers and secondarily the pedestrian (outsider).
Think of it as Asimov’s 3 laws of autos :)