"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
06/12/2015 at 14:22 • Filed to: None
5
42|
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
06/12/2015 at 14:22 • Filed to: None | 5
| 42 |
Back in April, a mother and her three kids were waiting to make a left turn from a two-lane US highway with a speed limit of 70 mph north of Austin. While they were stopped in the left lane (there is no turn lane at this point), a drunk driver in a pickup rear-ended the victim’s Nissan Altima, killing the two children who were sitting in the back seat. It would seem pretty clear to me that the fault lies with the drunk, who had previous DUI convictions. But since drunks generally don’t have money, the family is now going after Nissan, claiming “product liability, gross negligence and wrongful death, given the two children died despite wearing seat belts.”
“There were safer alternative designs to eliminate or significantly reduce the possibility of the catastrophic injury or death,” the document says.
The suit goes on to say the automaker “did not adequately design the Nissan Altima” and “did not adequately test to determine whether design and marketing defects existed.”
It’s certainly a tragedy, but it seems that if there’s any negligence it would be on the part of the state for not providing a turn lane. But I’m no lawyer.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Party-vi
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:25 |
|
Yes by all means water down the judicial system with your bullshit lawsuit because someone told you Nissan should have made a car that can drive after a 70mph impact.
BigBlock440
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:25 |
|
Can they point out any safer alternatives? And if so, why didn’t they buy them instead?
|
ttyymmnn
> BigBlock440
06/12/2015 at 14:27 |
|
Having kids myself, I can’t imagine losing two of them. So I imagine the family is grieving and bitter, and feel like somebody needs to pay (literally and figuratively) for this. But unless you go out and buy a Bradley Fighting Vehicle as your DD, I can’t think of how your backseat passengers wouldn’t be dead after getting rear-ended at 70+ by a heavier vehicle.
E92M3
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:30 |
|
They are wasting their time fighting with an automaker unless the car in question caused the accident (ex: unintended acceleration off a cliff, loss of brakes, etc). If my son was killed by a drunk driver no amount of money would help me anyway.
Luc - The Acadian Oppo
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:32 |
|
I love how ‘Merica is always looking to sue someone. In no way is this Nissans fault yet they have to waste valuable resources fighting this.
Why does everybody feel the need to be compensated for every tragedy.
In Canada you don’t hear of shit like this very often. No amount of money is going to bring your kids back. You are only making it harder for you to get over the loss if all you do is hang on to it in hopes to get rich because of it.
It will be so much harder for you to handle the loss after you go to court and loose than it would of been if you just dealt with it like a normal person.
Getting in a car is the most dangerous thing we do on a daily basis. You understand that risk and you deal with the consequences.
Unless the car had some type of major design flaw in no way is the automaker responsible.
TwinCharged - Is Now UK Opponaut
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:32 |
|
A tragedy yes, but I’m pretty sure that no current production car is capable of protecting its occupants in a rear-end collision at 70mph.
|
ttyymmnn
> Luc - The Acadian Oppo
06/12/2015 at 14:33 |
|
It’s possible that they need the money to cover the medical bills of the other victims in the crash. I don’t know how badly they were injured.
SidewaysOnDirt still misses Bowie
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:34 |
|
If there’s any negligence, it’s on the side of the state for even letting this get to court.
TheRealBicycleBuck
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:34 |
|
We had a similar incident in our family. My mom’s cousin was visiting another of her cousins and decided to take all of the kids on an outing. She was the only adult in a Suburban full of kids. A drunk in an F250 hit them from behind as they sat at a four-way stop.
The kids in the back seat were the lucky ones. Three dead instantly. The kids in the second row survived the crash, but burned to death in the fire. The oldest, a teenager, was sitting in the front seat. He survived the crash, but suffered severe burns as he tried to save his siblings. The cousin was injured and knocked unconscious in the crash (no airbags). She suffered burns from the fire before she was pulled out by a passer-by.
The drunk was uninjured. He went to jail for the night, but was released the next day. I know there were lawsuits, but I haven’t heard anything about them for years. Mom doesn’t like to talk about it.
505Turbeaux
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:35 |
|
I feel terrible for the loss, I mean christ if that happened to me I would be in a different place for real. But good fucking lord sue the drunk who was at fault, dont be an asshole with an asshole lawyer.
Also I am a drunk and have money. Bucking the trend!!! WAHOOOO
Also maybe it is because I havent drove drunk in 15 years or so
ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:36 |
|
I really want to see a study on how many accidents and deaths have been caused by not having protected left turn lanes compared to when there are dedicated lanes. Especially when you have a two-lane country road with a 55+ MPH speed limit, why isn’t there a space to get out of the way of traffic to make a left turn safely? It cannot cost significantly more to include a turn lane.
Also, whomever decided when planning streets to have a left-turn lane, but no dedicated left-turn signal can get fucked by a camel. There are so many left-turn lanes without signals around me, and I often have to deal with waiting forever trying to make that left because traffic is heavy.
|
BigBlock440
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:37 |
|
It’s a terrible situation for sure, I just don’t like ridiculous lawsuits and placing blame where it doesn’t belong.
“There were safer alternative designs to eliminate or significantly reduce the possibility of the catastrophic injury or death,” the document says.
I’m just wondering if the document say what those safer alternatives are, since they specifically call it out.
|
ttyymmnn
> TheRealBicycleBuck
06/12/2015 at 14:37 |
|
Mom doesn’t like to talk about it.
I don’t imagine she does. How horrible.
Jcarr
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:38 |
|
What should happen: Nissan fights it and wins because how do you engineer a family sedan that can survive a 70mph impact from a taller, heavier, body-on-frame vehicle.
What will probably happen: Nissan will chose not to fight and risk the bad publicity and quietly settle out of court.
A family from our church had their Honda Pilot hit head-on by an F-250 earlier this week, killing 3 of them. That accident happened at a slightly slower speed between two vehicles that were closer in height than the ones in your story. You simply can’t engineer a vehicle to protect you from everything and not weigh 10,000lbs and cost $100,000.
|
ttyymmnn
> ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
06/12/2015 at 14:39 |
|
I drive that road regularly. About 40 miles farther north, the limit goes up to 75, and since it’s a rural road there are rarely turn lanes. I think if it were me, I would pull over to the right shoulder and wait for a chance to cross all four lanes. I would never stop in the left lane of such a road.
spanfucker retire bitch
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:41 |
|
Assuming that drunk driver was going 70 (or maybe even faster given the fact they were drunk) and hit them in a pickup truck, I don’t think there are very many personal vehicles on the road today that would protect against some like that. Most crash test collisions are done at 50 or below. Once you get up to 60, 70, or higher you’re entering the territory of pure luck.
yamahog
> Luc - The Acadian Oppo
06/12/2015 at 14:42 |
|
In Canada, you also won’t be bankrupted by medical bills. Not so much about “getting rich” when you’re about to become homeless after insurance boots you (if you had any to begin with).
|
ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:44 |
|
Sounds like they need to have protected left-turns decades ago. You’d think turning left wouldn’t be hard for Texas to figure out either...
daender
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 14:46 |
|
Bummer she lost her kids but Panoz has a better chance of winning against Nissan than this lady. Should’ve gone after the state for the turning lane or letting that drunk stay on the road or gone after the drunk’s insurance company (but he’s probably too poor to afford that).
|
ttyymmnn
> daender
06/12/2015 at 14:51 |
|
I would bet that the driver is uninsured.
|
Luc - The Acadian Oppo
> yamahog
06/12/2015 at 15:03 |
|
You make a very valid point. I never thought of that part.
jkm7680
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 15:05 |
|
I’d be surprised if she can even find a lawyer willing to represent her for that case.
Sounds to me that she’s just in it for the money now.
|
ttyymmnn
> jkm7680
06/12/2015 at 15:06 |
|
As I said to somebody else, she may need the money for medical bills for herself and the other victim. But, seriously? I bet they would have no trouble at all finding a lawyer. Think of the percentage if she wins.
thebigbossyboss
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 15:11 |
|
Soon America won’t have any products due to all the liablility lawsuits. The drunk was at fault, and noone else.
|
jkm7680
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 15:13 |
|
Who knows.
That’s one battle that she’s never going to win. Every single time that somebody dies in a car crash, especially at 70 mph you don’t see somebody trying to get a lawsuit out of it. No lawyer with any knowledge would represent her.
|
thebigbossyboss
> TheRealBicycleBuck
06/12/2015 at 15:15 |
|
That’s totally horrific.
I am so sorry your family went through that.
I don’t know that you believe in God but if you do, you make take comfort in the solace that there is one judgement day that can’t be avoided.
|
BigBlock440
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 15:20 |
|
Holy shit, a road with a speed limit of 75 that you can make left turns from? Who thought that was a good idea? Anything over a 50 mph road like that should have a turn lane. You’re already putting 4 lanes in, 5 isn’t that much different.
|
ttyymmnn
> BigBlock440
06/12/2015 at 15:22 |
|
Welcome to Texas. There are lots of roads like this, more than they can widen in many years.
Tohru
> Party-vi
06/12/2015 at 15:23 |
|
To be fair, the Ford Crown Victoria Police Interceptor was designed to take a 70mph rear impact with minimal loss of life. However, if you didn’t have the optional fire suppression system, the tank was likely to rupture and burn the car to the ground.
|
Tohru
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 15:25 |
|
About the only passenger car you could buy where the backseat passengers would have a chance at surviving that is a 2005-2011 Crown Vic Police Interceptor with the optional automatic fire suppression package.
|
BigBlock440
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 15:36 |
|
I guess it doesn’t necessarily have to be widened, they could put a “Detroit/Michigan left” every so many miles. At least what I assume to be a Michigan left, as I’ve never actually driven in Michigan, but a “all turns from right lane” type deal.
|
ttyymmnn
> Tohru
06/12/2015 at 15:39 |
|
Or a Bradley Fighting Vehicle.
|
Tohru
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 16:00 |
|
Yes, well, you can’t really take a BFV through the Mickey D’s drive-thru.
BJ
> TheRealBicycleBuck
06/12/2015 at 16:11 |
|
When I hear about this type of story, it makes me wonder where my red line is. You know, the line where we cross over from “I wish misfortune upon you, you miserable fuck” to “I shall rain down hellfire up you and your kin”.
SnapUndersteer, Italian Spiderman
> yamahog
06/12/2015 at 16:24 |
|
It’s a sad state of affairs here in the USA, yea
|
yamahog
> Tohru
06/12/2015 at 16:37 |
|
Not with that attitude!
|
yamahog
> BigBlock440
06/12/2015 at 16:49 |
|
Kind of:
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
A bit hard to see in that diagram, but sometimes you turn from the left lane.
For example, if you were driving south on Woodward (major road, speed limit 50, with median) and needed to make a left, you would stay in the left hand lane until the next designated u-turn area, make the u-turn, then make a right.
However, if you were travelling on a cross street and needed to make a left onto Woodward, you would make a right, then use the designated u-turn lane.
That’s how it goes in SE Michigan anyway, not so much in rural areas.
DAT-AS-SUN
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 16:58 |
|
No turning lanes is a HUGE ISSUE in Austin.. I know this because I’ve now been here for about 4 years. Most commonly the person turning sits there dead stopped in the “fast lane” as they try to go left and as people go around them others have to swerve into the other lane to pass by and not slam the brakes because again their in the “fast lane” . Now there’s nothing in the story that says someone went around them leaving the drunk behind them to ram the vehicle and kill the kids but it is very likely that she wasn’t just sitting there but that someone behind her passed her and the drunk didn’t have time to react. Not trying to defend him at all and I’m sorry for that family’s loss.
|
ttyymmnn
> DAT-AS-SUN
06/12/2015 at 17:01 |
|
I’m guessing that she was just dead stopped in the 70+ lane and the drunk was so drunk he just didn’t react. I drive that stretch of 183 often. When they widened it from 2 lanes some years ago, they didn’t add a turn lane, nor did they make shoulders. It’s bad news.
|
DAT-AS-SUN
> ttyymmnn
06/12/2015 at 17:02 |
|
TTYYMMNN your a austin oppo ? See you at Cars & Coffee sunday ? I’ll be riding the grom !
|
ttyymmnn
> DAT-AS-SUN
06/12/2015 at 17:34 |
|
Yup. I live in the Pflugerville area. No promises on Sunday, but I’ve always wanted to check it out. At the Oasis?
|
DAT-AS-SUN
> ttyymmnn
06/15/2015 at 09:55 |
|
Well I ended up back in ATX around 4am sunday morning so needless to say I didn’t make it to C&C but it was raining anyhow..
The drag racing in DFW this past weekend was incredible. x315 radial cars going 4.03 @ 199 in the 1/8th