Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

Self-driving car kills pedestrian in Arizona

37 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

IBelieveWhatIWant
Posted (edited)
27 minutes ago, Nzo said:

Lets take your first point because well you and it seems a whole bunch of Obamabots are so misguided and absolutely ignorant of basic economics that it would be a crime to let you go on spewing your absolute nonsense anywhere on the planet.

330,000,000.00(Est. population of the U.S.) x 1200.00(basic income) x 12(months of the year) = almost 5 trillion dollars a year that you and the other incredibly ignorant are asking the government to go into debt every year. That's just to pay for basic income that's not including things like infrastructure, military, healthcare etc. So in a matter of 5 years you would eclipse the national debt that is currently 21 trillion dollars which took a very long time to get to, well except for the last administration.  And if you understand the bond market you would have to have someone that wants to buy that debt. Now who could possibly afford to buy so much debt and who quite frankly would want to given it would never ever be paid back? Those were rhetorical questions, you don't answer those. Not to mention adding that much liquidity to the economy would basically destroy the value of the U.S. dollar, so you would literally have to carry suit cases of cash to buy a loaf of bread There is only one way basic income works and you and the lot of you who believe in this false mantra have no idea how that would work because it is advanced theoretical economics... which could still be proven wrong in the real world because the liquidity issue is still binding.

 

On your second point, I was not overreacting I was stating that this autonomous driving tech is NOT NEEDED nor is it wanted by anyone that knows the mass casualties it will have on the economy. I was stating that the disgusting insurance industry will unfortunately decide whether it is adopted and that cases such as this are going to raise the cost of adopting this unwanted and unneeded technology. If enough cases are brought and the costs go through the roof than this technology will hopefully not be adopted. I was stating what at least in my circles is fact, there was or is any overreaction.

 

And Finally, that law does not apply when the vehicle does not have a driver... to be litigated and won in court by a decent lawyer. They were researching on the public, person killed was used as a Guinea pig as are we all. And that is just one of many arguments to be made.

National debt and basic income will need to be supplemented by actually taxing the rich. If America actually taxed the rich the way they should be. America wouldn't be in debt, blame shortsighted money hungry shill politicians for that not innovation that you can't stop no matter how hard you tap your heels together and say "I wanna stay in the dark ages", it ain't gonna happen.

 

I go back to my tapping heels together point for the next paragraph.

 

Finally, whether self driving or not, looking at the video you can CLEARLY see that even with a regular car it is unlikely that the person would have been able to stop in time because of 3 main reasons (Two of which is legally required and the other 2 the driver can't be held responsible for)

1. ARS 28-817 Always use a white headlight and a red rear reflector when you cycle after sunset or before sunrise (Required by law)

2. Reflective clothing (Is a recommendation) EDIT: Actually required by law

3. Don't cross without looking both way (Just a regular safety tip if you don't want to get the Darwin award)

 

Just by the first reason alone, there would be no case to be had. Unless a moronic judge was for some reason trying to make an example.

 

Unfortunately for this woman, she earned herself the Darwin award.

Edited by IBelieveWhatIWant
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 
toast
3 hours ago, IBelieveWhatIWant said:

Unfortunately for this woman, she earned herself the Darwin award.

Disgusting comment.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
7 hours ago, glorybebe said:

I watched the video and until just before impact, the pedestrian was not visible.  She was in dark clothes, no reflectors visible and not on a crosswalk.  She took her life in her hands and unfortunately she lost it.

I watched the vid also and I can clearly state that the accident could had been prevented by the driver but she failed on 2 major points here. First, the driver was distracted because of playing with an electronic device, which is exactly the scenario I`ve described in post #6. 2nd, the driver didnt responded adequate to the situation by just waiting for the impact. The golden rule (to survive) for motorcyclists and drivers in general is: " look where you want to drive or you will hit what you look at". If the driver would had the eyes on the street and the hands on the steering wheel, and well trained as well, she would had done an emergency break combined with an avoidance manoeuvre straight to the left, the old lady would still be alive.

The vid:

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=9y5z4_1521705001

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Captain Risky
On 3/22/2018 at 9:17 AM, MySummerJob said:

Nothing is fool proof, but I'm hoping as technology improves so will self-driving cars.

I'm thinking they'll have to be multi-sensor'd to detect things like this in all forms of climate, and lighting.

That being said though, my thoughts are with the victim's family, and friends.

like yourself i share the families grief in losing a loved one to this new technology. i personally think that new tech like this should be perfected in a more safe environment. if it was me i would not just be putting more censors on the actual vehicle but on and in the roads too. hate to think that this lady lost her life to a malfunctioning $5 sensor. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IBelieveWhatIWant
11 hours ago, toast said:

Disgusting comment.

Sorry, but there are very simple and basic ways to avoid this type of incident:

  • Crossing at a set of lights or at a crosswalk (somewhere lit up)
  • Wearing reflective gear (required by law)
  • Or the most easiest way, we were all taught as children...look both ways before crossing

Other than that it's just stupidity on the womans part

10 hours ago, toast said:

I watched the vid also and I can clearly state that the accident could had been prevented by the driver but she failed on 2 major points here. First, the driver was distracted because of playing with an electronic device, which is exactly the scenario I`ve described in post #6. 2nd, the driver didnt responded adequate to the situation by just waiting for the impact. The golden rule (to survive) for motorcyclists and drivers in general is: " look where you want to drive or you will hit what you look at". If the driver would had the eyes on the street and the hands on the steering wheel, and well trained as well, she would had done an emergency break combined with an avoidance manoeuvre straight to the left, the old lady would still be alive.

The vid:

https://www.liveleak.com/view?t=9y5z4_1521705001

 

As for this comment..."Ah, yes if the driver did this specific type of manoeuvre and turned at the right angle everything would be fine" Even thought a car can flip going as little of 20mph with a sharp turn. In either case someone would have died. The person who happened to die was the one breaking the law, hence the Darwin award comment

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
moonman
Posted (edited)

She should have known better than to be out in the road like that, she was clearly in the wrong. I don't blame the car, she was near impossible to see until it was too late.

Edited by moonman
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
1 hour ago, IBelieveWhatIWant said:

Sorry, but there are very simple and basic ways to avoid this type of incident:

  • Crossing at a set of lights or at a crosswalk (somewhere lit up)
  • Wearing reflective gear (required by law)
  • Or the most easiest way, we were all taught as children...look both ways before crossing

Other than that it's just stupidity on the womans part

Wait until you are old and with limited senses. Maybe you remember your comment then.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
toast
1 hour ago, IBelieveWhatIWant said:

As for this comment..."Ah, yes if the driver did this specific type of manoeuvre and turned at the right angle everything would be fine" Even thought a car can flip going as little of 20mph with a sharp turn. In either case someone would have died. The person who happened to die was the one breaking the law, hence the Darwin award comment

Thats blahblah. The accident happened because of the stupid driver and I hope she will get jailed for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hawkin
On ‎3‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 8:18 PM, glorybebe said:

I watched the video and until just before impact, the pedestrian was not visible.  She was in dark clothes, no reflectors visible and not on a crosswalk.  She took her life in her hands and unfortunately she lost it.

I've seen videos where people would cross the street while looking at their cellphones and not paying attention to their surroundings.

Some people would even have a child in tow.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MySummerJob
On 3/23/2018 at 6:27 AM, Captain Risky said:

if it was me i would not just be putting more censors on the actual vehicle but on and in the roads too. hate to think that this lady lost her life to a malfunctioning $5 sensor. 

That's actually clever, and something that I didn't think of when I first commented.

It would be good to have sensors everywhere (not just in/on the car, and in/on the road) to make sure nothing serious goes wrong. They could put sensors also on the side of the roads, and even put some solar panels (or other green technology) to help with other things.

Kind of like those speedometers, or billboards, and signs you see on the sides of the roads. They could even do the same thing with current traffic cams, and other radars that are already out there.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
IBelieveWhatIWant
On 27/03/2018 at 7:04 AM, MySummerJob said:

That's actually clever, and something that I didn't think of when I first commented.

It would be good to have sensors everywhere (not just in/on the car, and in/on the road) to make sure nothing serious goes wrong. They could put sensors also on the side of the roads, and even put some solar panels (or other green technology) to help with other things.

Kind of like those speedometers, or billboards, and signs you see on the sides of the roads. They could even do the same thing with current traffic cams, and other radars that are already out there.

The issue with that is people can come along and destroy them if they are just freely on the sides of the roads

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.