the maoster:
Franglais:
Hold on, you say of the slower vehicle
“…is not, I agree, at fault…” but also, “must bear a degree of responsibility”.
Can it be both?
…Of course it can. A man walking down the street shouting vile things at paasers by gets a kicking, not his fault but he must bear some responsibility. A cyclist cycling along the A1 getting squashed, certainly not his fault as it’s completely legal, but don’t you agree that he must bear some responsibility?
I’m not sure I fully agree.
If you shout insults, then you are at fault, then you might expect a slap as punishment. Justified or not, you’ve brought about your own desserts.
.
The cycling example is harder to dispute.
I wouldn’t cycle down a busy main road.
But is that because I know I shouldn’t, or because there are too many bad drivers around? It’s the latter isn’t it?
Blaming a cyclist for having too many bad drivers isn’t correct.
Again that explains the real world situation (and why I wouldn’t do it) but it doesn’t justify it.
No, I think the cyclist is innocent.
.
Here’s another parallel, maybe?
Years ago it was common to say girls shouldn’t wear shirt skirts or go out alone at night. If they were molested it was said: “she brought it on herself”.
Well that’s plain wrong. It may explain why some nutter chose her to grab, but does NOT excuse him for doing so.
Again I don’t like to see my female relatives out alone, and I would advise against it, but are they in any way responsible if harm comes to them?
No.
.
I’m agreeing some actions are riskier than others, but the extra risk involved is entirely down to bad drivers, or nutters or whatever, and those bad drivers etc CANNOT try to offload their responsibility onto their victims.
.
.
I think…:-/
.