Jump to content
Forums Gone... but not forgotten!

Tired of these Ads? Register Today!

  • Welcome to Forever Pontiac

    Welcome to Forever Pontiac, full of great ideas for Pontiac performance, maintenance, or for peer-to-peer assistance from Professional and DIY mechanics. Also, compete in our Pontiac monthly competitions. Please register if you'd like to take part.

Sign in to follow this  
FeedBot

Motorcyclist sues GM over crash with self-driving car

Recommended Posts

2018 Chevrolet Bolt EVIn a case that could potentially set a landmark precedent, a motorcyclist is taking GM to court for its role in a 2017 collision between the rider and a self-driving Chevrolet Bolt EV. The vehicle involved is part of GM’s self-driving Cruise Anywhere ride-sharing fleet that it hopes will soon be available to members of the general public...

View the full article

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tired of these Ads? Register Today!

While I see the broader implications to GM and other autonomous vehicle makers that can result in crashes between human driven vehicles versus computer controlled ones (this lawsuit would've inevitably happen somewhere IMO), I have to wonder if this guy would be suing GM if it wasn't an autonomous vehicle (albeit with a human backup) that' is involved in the first place. If it was a regular car, driven by a human being, would he sue GM or the car owner instead....even though the police placed him 100% at fault for the accident?

Edited by Frosty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Frosty said:

. If it was a regular car, driven by a human being, would he sue GM or the car owner instead....even though the police placed him 100% at fault for the accident?

He'd still say it was the car's fault. That's their narrative. I have a bike permit myself. I always watch for them ... but I don't ride anymore myself because the insurance is too costly. Because 90% of the riders on the road today are as bad as 90% of the car drivers ... and it's always someone else's fault.

Quebec at least knows this. And they punish it. Plates for a bike include 'no fault' insurance. For a bike over 500cc, you're looking at $500 to plate it. UNLESS it's classed as a 'sport bike'. If that's the case ... DOUBLE IT!! $1000 for plates for a 3 season vehicle. Why? Because if you're buying a 'sport bike', you're buying it to be stupid. Can't say I've seen anything to make me disagree with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, this is an interesting scenario.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Professur said:

He'd still say it was the car's fault. That's their narrative. I have a bike permit myself. I always watch for them ... but I don't ride anymore myself because the insurance is too costly. Because 90% of the riders on the road today are as bad as 90% of the car drivers ... and it's always someone else's fault.

Quebec at least knows this. And they punish it. Plates for a bike include 'no fault' insurance. For a bike over 500cc, you're looking at $500 to plate it. UNLESS it's classed as a 'sport bike'. If that's the case ... DOUBLE IT!! $1000 for plates for a 3 season vehicle. Why? Because if you're buying a 'sport bike', you're buying it to be stupid. Can't say I've seen anything to make me disagree with them.

Pro - I agree with you. Stupidity is never at fault when lawyers get involved (that almost sounds contradictory).

Since I know nothing of owning motorcycle and I have no desire to ride or own one, I defer to you experience with the costs associated with owning one. I must admit the logic is sound behind the fact that if you own a sport bike, we know you are going to be REALLY, REALLY, REALLY stupid on it, then you get to pay more for insurance for that privilege to be stupid and wrong. However, this is similar to what happened in the late 60s and early 70s when certain muscle cars like the GTO, 442, GSX, Road Runner, etc. were tagged by insurance companies as muscle cars and they had to pay a kings ransom for coverage (sometimes more than their car payment a month). However, buying a Lemans, Cutlass, Skylark, and Satellite with the same engine/suspension packages avoided all those charges. In today's politically correct world, some would argue that this profiling or discrimination.  Yeah, it is. Too bad. It's (currently) legal.

Edited by Frosty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Tired of these Ads? Purchase Enhanced Membership today to remove them!
×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.