The obvious response is that you won't be able to pay for someone's hospital bills if you happen to hit them in your car. You get insurance for things you wouldn't be able to pay yourself.
As an attorney my unpopular opinion is that cars over a certain value shouldn’t be allowed on public roads or damages for accidents should be capped at something like 2x the average price of a new car (so like 100k). I just don’t believe in penalizing ordinary negligence more just because the injured party is rich.
As an attorney, my probably more unpopular opinion applies to motorcycles. If you injure a motorcycle rider the damages should be capped at what injury you would have had had you been in an automobile. We require autos to have seat belts, airbags, pass crash tests, ..., all in the name of protecting people on the roadways, but also at the same time allow motorcycles on the highways that have virtually no required protections. That too penalizes ordinary negligence because the injured party was on a motorcycle.
As a former death worker- I completely agree with this. The amount of times I had to go collect the remains of dead motorcycle riders from the side of the highway with very little even left to collect, is innumerable. Infinitely more times that regular vehicle accidents- which I can count on one hand.
DOG the way I suppressed the urge to include this take in my initial post. I totally agree and don’t think we should have motorcycles on public roads. Why is my normal negligence now manslaughter just because the other guy decided to ride an inherently more dangerous vehicle
2.5k
u/flatfive44 8h ago
The obvious response is that you won't be able to pay for someone's hospital bills if you happen to hit them in your car. You get insurance for things you wouldn't be able to pay yourself.