http://wkow.madison.com/News/index.php?ID=19434
I suppose it is a minor consolation that the lives of motorists and bicyclists are held in the same low regard by our peers when it comes to evaluating a motorist's obligation to operate their vehicles safely. Here's the snippet that screams "widespread gross incompetence" to me: [snip] Parrott said that's because the fog is different from other factors like alcohol or fatigue. Many drivers told investigators that the fog set in too quickly, giving them little time to react. "We would have had witnesses available to the defense who said, all of a sudden, they couldn't see anything." [/snip] Here's how I would have been driving in that situation given what has appeared in the media: I would be maintaining a speed that allowed me to stop within my range of visibility. I do this by constantly evaluating how far ahead of my car (in seconds) I can see. In the event of a sudden reduction in visibility, I would reduce my speed to maintain my safe stopping distance within the new range of visibility. The only way I can see that I would perceive a situation where "all of a sudden, I can't see anything" would be if I was not paying attention to the road - but I would never do that because I believe I am responsible by law for anticipating the potential hazards that could exist just beyond my range of visibility. If I wasn't paying attention, wasn't experiencing some kind of personal emergency (heart attack, blackout, etc), and I killed somebody, I would expect to be found guilty of negligent homicide by use of an automobile. It is clear that few people share this understanding of their responsibilities as a road user. _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
