I'm going to type this relatively carefully given your anger, and hope you will acknowledge that I am separating the actions of the driver from the words of an editor.
I have read the editorial several times, and do not see anything which strikes me as wrong. The nutshell is in this line:
It is not illegal for them to do so, but it isn't smart, and the consequences can be deadly. |
In terms of overall advice to the denizens of the world, I can't fault him. All he's saying is don't bet your life on other people being switched on and smart. They may be in the wrong, but that's no satisfaction to you or your family when you're hit. I certainly see nothing in that editorial which attempts to excuse drivers or shift the burden of blame away from them. The only thing even close is
They must not understand how many distractions there are to take a motorist's attention away from the road. |
All it takes is a kid's ball to bounce onto the road. A driver is going to be focused on that, to see if a kid will come running into traffic to chase it. Maybe an ambulance siren will sound, and the driver checks his mirror to see if it's behind him. Heck, maybe he'll sneeze. There are no end of "legitimate" distractions which need to be prioritised by a driver. The editor is not talking about people shaving as they drive, which is obviously an inexcusable and self-caused distraction.
I am truly sorry for your loss, and you may not like to hear this, but I do not think that this editorial is deserving of any vitriolic email campaign. His main point is, indeed, common sense: Everyone else is a potential idiot, and you should do what you can to minimise your risk to them. I've never crashed into anyone, and doubt I ever will: But I'll wear my seat belt in case someone crashes into
me. When the light goes green at the crosswalk, do you not look to make sure everyone's stopped before you cross?
NTM