Charles L. Cotton wrote:MechAg94 wrote:I disagree. Stupid should really hurt sometimes.
Maybe in this case it means the victim's families taking every cent she has. I am not sure if that is possible in Canada. If she had her hazard lights on or made any attempt at all to be less of a road hazard, I might be less unmerciful about it.
We're going to have to disagree on this one. Stupid isn't criminal and you are advocating that we should look at the result and ignore intent. I don't think that's a standard you would like to be held to yourself. Do you not place an responsibility on the motorcycle operator?
Again, I would rule against her in a civil action, but I see absolutely no criminal intent, not even using a "criminal negligence" standard.
Chas.
I might be one of the few on here that see's it this way, but whenever I set out on the highway, I do so at my own risk. I cannot assume that every other driver is going to be courteous, signal for lane changes, or brake slowly. I take it as if everybody else on the road has the ability to kill me, and that all I can do to prevent it, is to drive defensively. Over obvious lane changes, double normal following distance, braking and preparing to divert in case of emergency. When I ride my bike, I am riding a bike, and everybody else is driving a 3 ton motorcycle crusher, and I'm playing "frogger" in my mind. If I hit somebody, it's as good as my own fault for not being vigilant and prepared for it, regardless of the stupidity of their reason for braking.
Should the same scenario have happened because a stroller rolled out across the highway, would the scenario be different? Knowing Canada, there is a good chance she could be free, though she did the same thing in both scenario's, they're may be judging her for her reason of stopping. Stupidity aside, you should always be prepared to come to a complete stop, should the person in front of you slam on their brakes for any reason. Their reason for stopping doesn't dictate weather you should've been prepared to stop...