The article calls for crackdown on drivers and may be rightfully so, but. I came to the US from the country where road laws are based on the concept of "operato

The article calls for crackdown on drivers and may be rightfully so, but. I came to the US from the country where road laws are based on the concept of "operator of the dangerous machine". Such an operator is at fault by default and have to prove their innocence. End even if they do, they still have to compensate medical expenses. Such compensations are not as ridiculously high as they are in the US but still may be quite expensive for the person who _wasn't guilty_ at the first place. And if they were guilty the future of the unfortunate car driver is much more grim. Courts routinely convict such drivers for 1-2 years behind bars (there even special "prisons" for such "criminals" which do not even look like prisons, more like military camps behind barbed wire). If the driver was drunk that could easily become 4-5 years or more. And you know what? Wikipedia says there're 13 deaths per 100k vehicles in the US and 55 in the country I came from (Russia). Go figure. What I'm trying to convey is that the article says "don't do , stop other party from doing the wrong thing". Okay. Stop investing money into Falcon landing, just make fricking rocket booster land straight onto the platform at sea. Stop making cars safe, just make them not to crash into each other. Etc. Sure! Where do I sign up? The author fails to deliver the answer "how". "Invest in the infrastructure" is not enough.