• ForgotAboutDre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    11 months ago

    It’s not excusable to run someone over because they weren’t looking.

    Drivers are incased in a tonne of steel, they should always be aware of the danger they pose to pedestrians. It’s criminal how light drivers are treated when they crash, even when they are fully at fault.

      • Dendrologist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        11 months ago

        Both of which are being controlled by people who should be cognisant of their surroundings as they’re metal death machines if improperly operated. One is just bigger than the other.

        A pedestrian on the other hand has no such obligation to be constantly aware of their surroundings. Pedestrians can be children with lower awareness of their surroundings, drunk people, stoned people, someone momentarily distracted by their phone, whatever. The onus is on those wielding the vehicle to be in control and slow down if a hazard is present, not the pedestrian. There’s a reason many countries do hazard perception tests as part of the theoretical part of getting a driving lesson. Because if a kid runs out onto the road and gets smooshed, it’s on the driver, regardless of whether that kid was being dumb or not.