On Mar 3, 3:35*am, wrote:
On Tue, 2 Mar 2010 20:47:18 -0800 (PST), Harry K
wrote:
On Mar 2, 4:55 pm, wrote:
On Tue, 02 Mar 2010 15:11:16 -0600, dpb wrote:
wrote:
...
What is mind boggling is that you want to blame the victims for not
being able to overcome something THAT SHOULD NEVER, EVER, HAPPEN.
The victims are 0% to blame.
...
So, _nothing_ ever breaks in your world?
"Should" ain't "doesn't" no matter what it is; if it's mechanical it can
fail.
Not reacting properly when there apparently was quite a lot of time
(evidenced by 911 call in the CA incident) makes the participant an
(albeit unwilling) accomplice in the result of a failure (granted) not
of their doing initially.
Unless there was a complete failure of the ignition system _and_
transmission shifter as well as the accelerator, then yes, there's no
doubt there was operator error involved as well as the mechanical failure.
Nobody's blamed those involved for the initiating event; only questioned
the outcome as being inevitable.
The counter example cited is too dissimilar to be of any import -- in
that case the remedy is to take some unusual precaution a priori (of
course, if one is proposing a walk in a particularly unsavory area after
dark if just might not be so unusual to either choose another
entertainment venue or take the precautions); in the case under
discussion it's the lack of an appropriate response to the event after
it has occurred when there is ample opportunity to take corrective
action (and afaik there's no data that says such actions aren't possible).
So, I'll disagree with the assertion that there's no culpability in
severity of outcome independent of the driver in the incidents until and
unless it's shown that the remedial actions were unavailable.
Rationalizew any way you wish. There is a stack of dead bodies that
says you are wrong.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
And the cure for _not_ dieing has been published and should have been
known by every one of the victims (provided there was _time_ to react
properly). *You "totally innocent" stance is groundless. *Every driver
should know enough about the vehicle operation to take the proper
action without having to be told.
Harry K
You are truly "lost in space"- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
So you think operator's of equipment should not know how the thing
operates or what simple things to do to stop it if it malfunctions?
Strange.
Harry K