1. How did this have anything with the rideshare company? This is explicitly an insurance question and 1000% the liability of the attacker.
2. Please explain at what point when the driver voluntarily downloaded an app, voluntarily signed up to be a driver, and decided to take time out of her leisure to whatever commitment she chose, was she “enslaved.”
3. How on earth did you bring a retarded socialist ideology into this interaction rather than reading the story first what it was?
If you have a problem with the fact that she may not get anything from the attackers insurance then bring that up with the idiotic backward law of forcing people to buy liability insurance instead of the obvious and simple path of having everyone have their own insurance pay for them so that responsible people aren’t victims of criminals, drunks, or negligent lunatics. This would be the main she will end up not compensated.
Thread collapsed
I’m just being cynical about the nature of American corporatism. I expect (1) the attacker’s insurance to refuse to pay and instead sue the rideshare company, (2) the rideshare company to redirect the lawsuit onto the driver - “hey! they weren’t operating their own vehicle according to our terms of service. We only provided an app!”, and (3) the socialist nature of our own legal system in 21st century America to make this all about being the victim’s fault, thereby totally ignoring the entire reason the event all took place to begin with - some psycho tried killing his woman AND another person in the process.
Don’t shoot the messenger for pointing out all of the way things are broken in our society. I’m with you on all of your points made about how things ought to be.
Thread collapsed
