NYC Lawmaker Proposes Pedestrian Ban on Cell Phones
Not to sound like a jerk
but if someone is dumb enough to cross the street without looking both ways, they deserve to get run over.
...
I agree, but remember that it isn't just pedestrians who are at risk. Suppose you're driving along and have to slam on your brakes to avoid hitting some idiot talking on their phone, and suppose that this causes a traffic accident. Well, pedestrians don't have to carry insurance, and the pedestrian might just keep on walking, while you're left there to deal with the aftermath.
...
msteven3 said:
I agree, but remember that it isn't just pedestrians who are at risk. Suppose you're driving along and have to slam on your brakes to avoid hitting some idiot talking on their phone, and suppose that this causes a traffic accident. Well, pedestrians don't have to carry insurance, and the pedestrian might just keep on walking, while you're left there to deal with the aftermath.
Simple.
Run the stupid SOB over!
nuff said.
...
Vipermad said:
Simple.
Run the stupid SOB over!
nuff said.
Yes, BUT, in many jurisdictions, pedestrians have the right of way. If you hit the idiot, and he was not breaking any laws, such as jaywalking, you may be legally at fault for the accident. OTOH, if he was breaking a law, such as the one proposed, you'll likely be off the hook, and he'd be the one at fault.
It's kind of like if you rear-ended another car. If the other driver did nothing wrong, you're presumed to be at fault because you should have left enough distance between you and the other car to be able to stop in time to avoid the collision. However, if you can show that the car cut you off, which is against the law, you can e...
(continues)
...
This forum is closed.
