Quote:
Originally Posted by mazeroni
Just to be clear, at this point I'm arguing a point because I think it is an interesting ethical and moral discussion. Getting to see how other people perceive the action or inaction of people in situations is insightful.
So just to clarify my own points:
He commented how fast it was coming up the emergency lane.
The commentary does not say 'fast,' just that he is moving up the emergency lane. I think this is an important distinction, and it goes back to my initial comment about it being dark and other headlights obscuring the situation. He does write 'slow him down,' but I will repeatedly justify that because...
"plenty of time"
I am saying the FR-S driver had plenty of time to slow down, stop, or avoid the object. I'm not sure that anyone can argue this point. It's driving 101.
Society assumes that other drivers will use reasonable judgement, such as recognizing safe stopping distances of your car, how to recognize what is a safe speed when around stopped or slow traffic, and the necessity to drive within the marked lanes and be aware of slow or stop for objects in the roadway or that might be entering the roadway.
Speeding down the emergency lane without flashers or awareness of lit objects in that lane doesn't seem like it should be a contentious point. The FR-S had no reasonable cause to be doing what he did.
It was reasonable for the Jeep to assume he could get him to slow or stop.
He knew there was a cop right ahead and could simply have told him .
Yea, that's a fair what-if.
Without putting himself and all the drivers nearby at risk.
That's a fundamental disagreement that won't be rectified. I can't see how it's a danger to himself or others, and the video is evidence of that. The only thing we can say for certain is the only risk is the FR-S driver who has now been the direct cause of two crashes, and fled twice. Replace the Jeep with a Kia Rio and I'm 100% changing my tune in regards to safety. But that is playing 'move the goalposts' and that's only fun for a little while.
 |
We still have no clue how close he was when the Jeep moved over at a very low rate of speed.
A totally attentive, sober and responsible driver may have hit a car moving into their lane with no warning and at such a low speed. It happens every day. In this case there was a drunk, scared, and bad driver involved so the Jeep driver had no clue what he was setting himself up for when he pulled into the lane. As you said hindsight is 20/20 and we have the advantage in knowing the results. The Jeep driver did not have the knowledge of what the full situation was when he tried to block.
Nobody said the FRS should have been speeding down the lane the way he was. The fact is that he was and at that point there was no real hazard until the Jeep pulled over. There are of course many "what if" scenarios that could be thrown out there if the Jeep hadn't pulled over but we know what happened so conjecture is just that. Until the Batman wantta be tried to block him there had only been one accident not two. The Jeep's action directly contributed to the second one.
Doesn't matter what vehicle was being used to block it could have resulted in a serious incident. The wrong impact could have spun out a Jeep or even a transport as easily as it could a Kia. The FRS could have bounced out into traffic, flown over the wall into oncoming or any one of a thousand different scenarios ( all still conjecture of course). If such a thing did happen then all the other cars on the road would have been at risk as well. No it did not happen in that case but the potential was still there.
I am not blaming the Jeep driver for any of the incident but simply stating that his actions did not resolve anything. They actually escalated it by adding a second crash and could have had much worse results then they did.