Wednesday, June 9, 2010

Pedestrians rule

I read a bizarre story the other day. Two women (and a baby) took decided they wanted to ‘see’ the Bandra-Worli Sealink, and hopped into a cab that would take them to the other end and back. Midway through the ride, when the cab driver informed them that they would have to pay toll to travel up and down the bridge, they decided to get off and walk back home.
Not only was their decision fundamentally unfair to the driver, who would not only have to burn fuel to get to the other end, but also be liable to pay the toll charges, it was illegal and stupid. Pedestrians are not allowed on the bridge, and it is absolutely unsafe to attempt to walk on a bridge where the incoming traffic is not expecting you.
Sure enough, the inevitable happened. One of the ladies got hit by a car and was knocked unconscious. The driver, instead of speeding away as he could, was decent enough to take the lady to a hospital.

And now comes the absolutely bizarre part. The police registered a case of rash and negligent driving against the driver, and also booked him for causing grievous hurt by act endangering life or personal safety of others.
Were speed guns consulted to determine if he was driving over speed limit? No.
Did they hear the statement of the lady who was not hit- “On seeing the speeding car I moved away with the baby but (she) wasn't as quick. She was hit and became unconscious.”- apparently not.
The ladies knew they had no business being on the bridge- they should have been more careful and kept a watch for incoming cars. The driver was coasting along on what he was sure was going to be a lane free of any obstructions- he could not be expected to anticipate the pedestrians who did not get out of his way.

And yet, the driver got booked, for practically no fault of his. And the lady who broke the law and was stupid got away with just a concussion and a few broken bones.
Why? Because the driver of the car is richer than the lady, and can afford to bribe the police into letting him go. And because the lady is a pedestrian, and no laws regulate the behaviour of pedestrians.

Didn’t I say it was bizarre?
And is it any wonder I refuse to drive in this city?


Margot Kinberg said...

Rayna - That is a bizarre story!What a strange, dangerous and self-entitled thing to do! I do feel for that drive, even though of course, it's sad to think he hit someone. So...strange.

Deb and Barbara said...

I think even when bribes aren't a factor, in accidents like these the driver usually ends up being guilty before proven innocent, and the pedestrian, innocent before proven guilty.

I've heard a number of bizarre stories like this over the years. Makes you shake your head.


Mason Canyon said...

Very bizarre indeed.

Thoughts in Progress

aLmYbNeNr said...

That is just completely wrong. If pedestrians aren't allowed on the bridge, then it should be the lady's fault. Completely.
There's a bizarre law here that applies to every state except for DC: if you're driving by and someone parked opens their car door and it hits your car, you're at fault, NOT them. This happened to me in my own neighborhood. I had to pay for all of the damage, even though they opened the door on MY car (and they were double parked which was the first problem). In DC, if they open their car door on your it's THEIR fault, as it SHOULD be.

Jaydee Morgan said...

Yep, it truly is amazing what 'stupid' is allowed to get away with - everywhere.

Doli said...

This is indeed really silly! Pedestrians should be responsible for this.. I mean it was their fault! how can they go on a road meant only for driving and no pedestrians involved! weird

Anonymous said...

OH goodness - those women risked their own lives AND that of a baby! The taxi driver should have refused to let them get out...


Jayne said...

It is all mixed up, isn't it? Thank you for sharing these stories though, fascianting glimpses of your part of the world. :)

Diandra said...

Yes, it's kind of bizarre... but are there really no rules and laws concerning pedestrians? As far as I know, we do have a couple of them over here...

Karen Walker said...

Weird. I don't think I'd drive either.

Lydia Kang said...

That seems to be a case of several people not thinking.
I'm glad no one got hurt!

Clarissa Draper said...

And people wonder why there are hit and runs. Who wants the aggravation? I think the woman is at fault and should be responsible.

Sad sad story.

Like your new background by the way...


dipali said...

How utterly crazy:(

L. Diane Wolfe said...

That sort of thing makes me mad!!! Grrr...

welcome to my world of poetry said...

Yes it is very bizare and the ladies were at fault, Here last week a taxi driver went on a rampage he shot his brother and 11 other people on the street.
It is in one of the most beautiful areas in England but what torment for his mother she lost one son and then the murderer shot himself.
It certainly is a bizare world.


slommler said...

Totally weird!! And yes those ladies were definitely at fault. And that poor taxi driver. Not to mention the driver who could have left her lay!!
No good deed goes unpunished as they say!

Marjorie said...

Wow that is insane!

Rayna M. Iyer said...

@ Margot - it is sad that he hit someone, but I really feel sorry for the driver. Much as I hate to say it, the lady had it coming.

@ Deb and Barbara - it is really sad, isn't it? There are rules for drivers, their licences can be revoked, but so many accidents (at least in developing countries) are caused by the pedestrians.

@ Mason - totally

@ Amber - that is such a stupid law. I mean, it is beyond stupid. Poor you.

@ Jaydee - and the baby. She even put the baby at risk while enjoying the view.

@ Doli - totally. If it is no pedestrians, it is no pedestrians for a reason. If they wanted pedestrians, they would have built a footpath.

@ Fiona - exactly. And the baby!
Not sure if the taxi driver had much of a choice. If he could hold them, he would have.

@ Jayne - you're welcome. I learn so much from all of you, it is only fair I give a bit back.

@ Diandra - none in our country. And no rules governing cyclists either. If a cyclist is involved in an accident, the other guy is at fault, no matter what.

@ Karen - just not worth the trouble

@ Lydia - some people are truly bizarre, aren't they?

@ Clarissa - precisely. I am sure the driver stopped only because he knew he was definitely not at fault. Had he even suspected he would be caught in all this, he would have just run, and the lady may well have bled to death.

@ dipali - very

@ Diane - me to. And then we wonder why people don't help others.

@ Yvonne - that is such a sad story. Feel so sorry for the mother

@ SueAnn - so true- No good deed goes unpunished - and that's the pity

@ Marjorie - it is, isn't it?


Related Posts with Thumbnails