The bridge was destroyed since a decade but still on Google maps. There were no markings, no road blocks, nothing. It was 11pm in a pitch black country side road, the car was a jeep or something like that, aka not the best breaking action on the planet.

You know you are supposed to be able to stop on half the distance you can see ? But do you ?

So now pictures yourself driving in pitch black environment on a road so far up your mom’s ass there’s literally zero chance of seeing another car. It’s 11pm, you’re tired, eager to go home and your gps show you a straight line. On your lights beam you only see road, trees and darkness, you’re probably driving 50kph or more as you don’t feel the bumps on your huge murican style car.

Suddenly the road is darker and you see a huge gap (or maybe you missed it by a few seconds as you were changing radio station or checking your speedometer for half a second).

Add 1 or 2 seconds for your brain to react and you need at least 15 meters to stop, more if you’re driving faster.

Then also account that probably 85% of drivers are not pilots and they never brakes hard enough during an emergency (when they say to crush the brakes pedal with all your strength they mean it).

Result ? You’re probably dead, as well as most everyday drivers in the exact same situation, so here take your free Darwin Award 🥇 🤷🏻‍♂️

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Sky News has a photo of it.

Imagine all that you said, and this is the bridge. It’s not a very big one, if it was in place you wouldn’t likely notice there was even a bridge there.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk -4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Result ? You’re probably dead, as well as most everyday drivers in the exact same situation,

Then those drivers are also happily abdicating there responsibility as a responsible driver.

If they hit a child or collapsed adult due to failing to watch where they are going. Who do they blame then.

As a disabled person with balance and vision issues. Attitudes like this are basically stating I and all elderly of physically infirm people, have zero legal right to leave my house. As drivers cannot be expected to watch where they are going if I fall.

The simple fact you and far to many modern drivers forget every day is. You are legally responsible and qualified and licenced when you drive. The fact that conditions make you unsafe t drive. Is in no way overridden by the fact that not getting to drive is incovinient and you are tired. If you cannot see what you are driving towards. You are legally required to stop driving. Not use your multi ton potential killing machine to make your life a littlke less hard.

[–] Skunk@jlai.lu 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What the fuck are you on ? It’s like I said "I like sandwiches" and you’re screaming "so you hate pastas!"

I just stated facts and statistics I did not said it was an excuse for killing peoples, that just the hard truth, most drivers are shit while thinking they are not (and I say that as an everyday cyclist).

I don’t fucking care who they blame or who you do when you fuck up, I just don’t like seeing internet experts trashing a dead dad because of a shitty clickbait title.

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk -1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

you suggested a person driving in a dangerous way where he cannot see. Is undeserving of the Darwin award criticism.

So while it may not be your intention. Your lack of consideration is saying exactly that this person has a right to travel in a way that risks killing children.

And that drivers in general should not be held accountable for the requirement to do so safly.

The fact you are to ignorant to consider the full conclusion of your statements. Dose not mean you are free from critisim for them. Or others who may find the inconsideration of you driving advice offensive. ("your probably dead" To someone advising he is responsible for his choices). Dose not mean anyone strongly disagreeing with you must be on drugs.

[–] Bitrot@lemmy.sdf.org 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Your example is flawed. If you’re driving at night in the rain in a rural area and hit a person who runs into the road, you’re not going to be charged and it would be very difficult to show any negligence.

Have you ever left the city?

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 0 points 1 year ago

If you live in the rural areas. So do many elderly. It is entirely possible and not uncommon for folks like me. With balance and vision issue. To fall and get knocked out.

If you are driving in a manor where you cannot see a bridge is out to avoid killing yourself. You are driving in a manner where you cannot see a child or pedestrian. And definatly can't see someone ill in the road.

And yes you are entirly responsible. In the rural UK where I live. And cities. You are required to travel at a speed where you can safly see within you total stopping distance.

So no my example is far from flawed. My next door niegbours daughter was killed this way in 1988. Amd the driver went to prison. Happens in other cases. But thats the only one I know personally.