260
Man Dies After Being Mowed Down by Self-Driving Tesla, Police Say (futurism.com)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/FuckMusk@lemmy.ca
54 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [S] 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (7 children)

...was not the person responsible for operating an immense metal box capable of killing with ease in a safe manner.

Could have been a deer and a very a similar situation, it is still on the driver even if you can also argue it is on the person the driver hits. The pedestrian didn't introduce a weapon threatening to go out of control, the driver did.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    You’re absolutely right, it’s still 100% the responsibility of the driver, FSD or not. I’m no fan of FSD, in part because of situations like this.

    But your hatred of cars is clouding your judgment here. Calling all cars “weapons” has some merit where cars and pedestrians/cyclists have to co-exist, but on freeways such as this where pedestrians are legally prohibited it falls a little hollow. That someone was crossing 12+ lanes of protected freeway (meaning is separated by fences or walls) at 2:35am is very very unexpected, making it more of an outlier than indicative of anything. It also points to mental health or some other impairment of this 71 year old person, which like you said could’ve been a deer or something.

    Like it or not (I’m guessing you do not, and I don’t blame you) this happened in a car-centric area; I only bring that up because I think it’s reasonable to not expect pedestrians where they are legally prohibited. Of course, that does NOT resolve the driver of any responsibly, but it does explain it a bit.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago

    Cars will never not exist. They should exist less and not interfere with other human friendly modes of transportation. That is a reasonable goal.

    That goal requires specific places cars go, and for other people’s safety, people on foot do not.

    A highway where (in my state) it is illegal to be walking, is not where the people go.

    Thats a bad decision on the person walking and a bad decision by the driver, but fundamentally if you assign cars go quickly from point A to B on highways designed for cars… don’t walk there.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago* (2 children)

    Deer are regularly killed by drivers, we call it roadkill.

    Is it really legal to cross an interstate on foot? You're not even allowed to drive slow vehicles on big highways in some countries, let alone walk on them. It's dangerous, that's why there are usually barriers to discourage you from doing so.

    This is very different from an accident on roads meant to be shared between cars and pedestrians and cyclists

    Do we know if the person ran onto the road or if the driver actually had time to react?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] [S] 3 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    I am not saying it should or shouldn't be legal to be a pedestrian in that environment I am saying that doesn't make the driver not responsible for controlling their vehicle.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago

    It seems the driver OR autopilot tried swerving but was too late. We have no idea which one it was.

    If I straight up jump in front of you, are you immediately at fault when you don't have time to make an evasive maneuver? Perhaps let's not pass judgement without seeing the video.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent