05-15-2018, 02:48 AM
Here's another angle -- a somewhat logical one -- to think about.
As someone who works in the insurance industry (yep, one of those guys) I've learned of one angle not often considered: comparative negligence or, in more strict jurisdictions, contributory negligence. I'm a bit rusty on these since I don't work directly in legal or claims, so keep that in mind.
Anyway, these doctrines hold that if the harmed party could have prevented a portion of the damage, then that party has a diminished claim or, in the case of contributory negligence, no claim at all.
This puts the freedom of choice in a different light. Not wearing gear, especially a helmet, makes the human and financial cost of any accident much higher. This could draw the ire of the car driving public so that at some point they push for wider adoption of these doctrines to shield themselves from the cost of what may be perceived as rider preventable injuries.
And virtually all of us buy auto insurance and bear the cost of situations where claims costs run higher because certain precautions are not broadly adopted.
Not judging at all. Just another angle.
As someone who works in the insurance industry (yep, one of those guys) I've learned of one angle not often considered: comparative negligence or, in more strict jurisdictions, contributory negligence. I'm a bit rusty on these since I don't work directly in legal or claims, so keep that in mind.
Anyway, these doctrines hold that if the harmed party could have prevented a portion of the damage, then that party has a diminished claim or, in the case of contributory negligence, no claim at all.
This puts the freedom of choice in a different light. Not wearing gear, especially a helmet, makes the human and financial cost of any accident much higher. This could draw the ire of the car driving public so that at some point they push for wider adoption of these doctrines to shield themselves from the cost of what may be perceived as rider preventable injuries.
And virtually all of us buy auto insurance and bear the cost of situations where claims costs run higher because certain precautions are not broadly adopted.
Not judging at all. Just another angle.