5 ms·
Nice little FUD by WSJ in their subheadline: "Pedestrian tested positive for methamphetamine and marijuana" -- not referred to again in the article, moreover I
by bb101 8y ago
Nice little FUD by WSJ in their subheadline: "Pedestrian tested positive for methamphetamine and marijuana" -- not referred to again in the article, moreover I have trouble seeing the relevance to the accident.
- Zak 8y agoIt is mentioned again at the end of the article. It's relevant to the accident because it provides an explanation for the pedestrian crossing the road outside a crosswalk without adequately checking for traffic.
- admax88q 8y agoYeah only druggies J-walk.
- filoleg 8y agoNot at all, sober people jaywalk too. They just tend to check their surroundings a bit better than their high counterparts for any cars coming to potentially hit them.
- IncRnd 8y agoNice try, but that doesn't apply to this specific case, where the car could and should have stopped but didn't.
- Zak 8y agoThe car should have stopped automatically, but that system was disabled. The pedestrian shouldn't have been there, but made a bad decision. The pedestrian should have been more aware of her surroundings, but was impaired or not paying attention. The safety driver should have been paying more attention to the road, but was also monitoring system displays. This crash didn't have a single cause. Any one of those factors being handled correctly would have prevented it.
- IncRnd 8y ago> This crash didn't have a single cause. It is not the fault of the pedestrian for having been slaughtered, especially due to the immense amount of time after the car saw the pedestrian until the time that the accident occurred.
- djsumdog 8y agoIt's a common part of NTSB reports. Nationally, these are tracked by police in accidents for national statistics. I guess they didn't have to include it, but it's in the report.