• Zagorath@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    That’s brilliant.

    Honestly I’d push for a change in law such that a crash between a car and a more vulnerable road user is legally presumed to be the car’s fault unless evidence is provided to the contrary. The big problem we’ve had far too many times where I live, and in many other parts of the world, is that because you can’t prove the driver was riding negligently (or more to the point: because you can’t convince a car-brained jury pool or judge panel to find that they were negligent), far too often they get off scott-free.

    • Rinox@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Generally speaking, here it’s often presumed that it’s the car’s fault, or at least that’s how I feel it’s perceived.

      Still, negligent driving includes DUI, driving while on the phone, driving too fast, driving in the opposite lane, not stopping to a red light or yield, illegal passing of another car and failing to stop after the incident occurred.

      Moreover, the law now specifies that DUI is a criminal offense even when no incident occurred and blood level of alcohol is above 0.8 g/l, with possible jail time from 6 months to a year.

      It’s become quite strict. Although I’m not sure how much it will actually affect the number of incidents, I’m not always very pro to “just increase the penalties” kind of laws. We need a more comprehensive plan to reduce the likelihood of incidents as much as possible, especially deadly incidents.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        here it’s often presumed that it’s the car’s fault

        By people and the media, or by the law? Because those are definitely not the same.

        Though unfortunately in most of the anglosphere, the answer is that the average person will presume it’s the *non-*car-driver’s fault, and the law will make no presumption either way (which has the effect of letting drivers get off).

        Moreover, the law now specifies that DUI is a criminal offense even when no incident occurred and blood level of alcohol is above 0.8 g/l

        Wow that’s really cool! Is 0.8 g/L the only level of BAC that’s used in Italian law? Or are there like, other lower thresholds with less legal severity? I ask because, assuming 0.8 g/L is the same as a 0.08% BAC, that seems really high. For context, in carbrained Australia the limit is .05.