BustemBigBlue 178 Posted January 28, 2005 Share Posted January 28, 2005 Mexico has some a$$-backward laws. Link CIUDAD JUAREZ, Mexico (AP) - A man hospitalized with a possible skull fracture and other injuries after being struck by a car is being held responsible for damages to the vehicle.Sergio Segundo Ruiz, 60, was hit Monday about 10:30 p.m. when he crossed an avenue, apparently without taking any precautions, said Jose Adan Reyes, an official from the city's traffic department. Under local law, crossing the street with disregard for safety and approaching traffic is an infraction, Reyes said. A city police officer was posted outside Segundo's hospital room. The owner of the 1986 Ford Taurus involved in the accident was freed and is awaiting payment for the damages, the extent of which was not released. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted January 29, 2005 Share Posted January 29, 2005 I sort of agree with this. I would make sure the man was alright, but if he didn't take the necessary precautions to avoid being struck, then, yes, he should be held responsible for the damages. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TitanTiger 20,510 Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Nope, sorry. Car vs. pedestrian = win for car everytime. Now, the driver shouldn't be responsible for the guy's injuries unless it was determined that he had plenty of time and room to stop or avoid him and just didn't. But the pedestrian shouldn't have to pay for the damages to the car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 328 Posted January 31, 2005 Share Posted January 31, 2005 Whats your reasoning behind that? Im thinking its similar to someone pulling out of an intersection or stop sign without looking. They cause a wreck, and are responsible for damages to both parties. If a guy meanders out into the street without looking, then he should suffer the same penalties the guy who pulled out did. However, in some states (Maine I know for sure, I lived there for a bit), if someone is in a crosswalk, they have the right of way. A pedestrian could literally jump out in busy traffic, and if he gets hit its the driver's fault... I hated that law, its really annoying. It cultivates a bunch of people who don't look before they cross. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Auburn85 432 Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 On a similar note, I'm not crazy about the law in Alabama where if you hit someone from behind, and really no matter the circumstances, it's your fault Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigsixfive 328 Posted February 1, 2005 Share Posted February 1, 2005 On a similar note, I'm not crazy about the law in Alabama where if you hit someone from behind, and really no matter the circumstances, it's your fault 143159[/snapback] Its like that in most states that assign blame in auto accidents. If you think about it, there's rarely an instance where it wouldn't be the rear ender's fault. I can think of a few scenarios that are loopholes, but in general... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.