An incident in Hefei, Anhui Province, in which he was convicted of secondary responsibility without contact, has aroused widespread attention and discussion. On the day of the incident, a black carsuvDriving normally on the road, I was about to turn right, when suddenly a septuagenarian riding an electric car in the wrong direction fell and fell awaysuvFive meters away from the ground. BlacksuvThe owner of the car quickly got out of the car to help the old man and help contact the family. However, to his surprise, after the elderly family arrived at the scene, not only did they not express their gratitude, but asked him to bear the medical expenses. So the owner of the car called the police for help, but the traffic police stood on the side of the old man's family, blaming the owner of the car and judging him to bear secondary responsibility. This makes the owner feel angry and helpless.
BlacksuvThe confusion and anger of the car owner sparked a heated discussion among netizens. Many netizens stood on the side of the car owner and asked the traffic police to give a specific basis for the punishment. They made many interesting analogies and comments, ridiculing the judgment of the traffic police and the reasonableness of being convicted of secondary responsibility without contact. For example, someone asked if a thief was stealing something and saw someone passing by and injured himself, would the person passing by also be responsibleSome people also said that not only the owner of the car should be held responsible, but also the building next to it, the Environmental Sanitation Bureau, the traffic police and the building opposite. These funny comments sparked heated discussions and laughter among netizens.
In the face of netizens' questions, the Hefei Traffic Police Brigade responded to the matter and explainedTransportationThe accident does not have to be a physical collision, and the judgment depends on the actual situation, but it is not convenient to disclose the specific details. However, this answer was not satisfactory to netizens. They believe that the traffic police did not give blacksuvThe specific reason for the car owner to be held sub-liable is only to vaguely avoid the problem.
As a result, netizens spontaneously looked for the basis for the traffic police's punishment. They found that, according to the RoadsTransportationArticle 76 of the Safety Act stipulates that only if the accident is caused byNon-motorized vehiclesWhen the driver intentionally causes it, the motor vehicle party is not liable at all;Otherwise, even if the motor vehicle is not at fault, it will be liable for compensation of no more than 10%. This regulation is designed to protect the rights and interests of the weak. In this accident, although blacksuvThe owner did not make a mistake, and the owner of the electric car belongs to the wrong direction, but due to the presence of a non-contact collision, it is blacksuvThe owner of the vehicle still needs to bear the necessary responsibilities. However, this is just speculation by netizens, and the real basis for punishment still needs to wait for the response of the Hefei traffic police.
This incident of being convicted of secondary responsibility without contact sparked my questionTransportationReflections on the division of responsibility for accidents. Although it is necessary for the law to protect the rights and interests of the weak, overemphasizing the liability of motor vehicles may lead to some unreasonable penalties and adversely affect the legitimate rights and interests of vehicle owners.
First of all, we need to recognize the special nature of non-contact collision accidents. Compared with traditional collision accidents, non-contact collisions often have no obvious physical damage, but are more of a mental gain and loss. In this case, placing too much emphasis on the responsibility of the motor vehicle may lead the owner to choose to avoid or dare not reach out in time for fear of responsibility, thus increasing the risk of injury.
Second, we need to thinkTransportationThe fundamental purpose of security. TransportationThe purpose of formulating laws and regulations is to ensure the safety of the people's lives and property. As oneSocialWe should work together to create orderTransportationEnvironment. However, too much pursuit of penalties and the allocation of responsibility for motor vehicles may lead to the avoidance and neglect of dangers and accidents by car ownersTransportationThe environment has become more chaotic and dangerous.
Finally, we need to balance protection and incentives. Protection is necessary, but overprotection can lead to moral hazard. We need to think about how we can motivate people to comply while protectingTransportationRules and moral bottom line. Perhaps, we can strengthen itTransportationSafety education and awareness-raising, improvingTransportationTransparency and comprehensibility of regulations, as well as the establishment of fair and equitable judicial and enforcement mechanisms to achieve this balance.
in the futureTransportationIn management, we need to consider the interests of all parties more comprehensively, and while protecting the weak, we cannot ignore the legitimate rights and interests of car owners. This can only be achieved on the basis of balancing the interests of all partiesTransportationSafe andSocialA harmonious win-win situation. Let's work together to create a safer and more orderly travel environment.