The poll on the KXNT website [1] has been running for a while and I must say that I find the results interesting. The question:
The [police] officer who was killed in a crash last week was driving 109 mph [175 km/h] with no lights, sirens or seatbelt. The other driver who turned in front of him had been drinking, but was not legally DUI. Who is at fault?
The results at the time of writing:
The Officer. He was totally reckless. ( 57% )
Mostly the officer, but the driver contributed. ( 24% )
Both of them. It was a “perfect storm”. ( 15% )
Mostly the driver, but the officer contributed. ( 2% )
The driver. He was still impaired. ( 2% )
I voted for “The Officer. He was totally reckless” the other day, as I don’t think the other driver’s legal amount of alcohol contributed to the situation, however as any amount of alcohol can impair judgement, I can understand the thinking behind “Mostly the officer, but the driver contributed”, but I can’t comprehend the thinking behind the other answers.
Would anyone like to fill me in?
Samuel
Comments Disabled To "Who is at fault here?"
#1 Comment By padders On May 23, 2009 @ 1:58 pm
The officer. 100% at fault. Trained in high-speed driving as I’m sure he is, he nevertheless betrayed a complete lack of judgement driving in excess of posted speeds for no reason, thus impeding his reaction time. (He should be sacked for his misuse of police resources, too; unfortunately for him, he was involved in an accident, otherwise, he might have got off with a reprimand.)