Man hit by car, nobody cares

Yes I agree... anyone not at least running to get 911 out... should be fined... not jailed cause that would cost us....

Charge them all 1000 a pop...
 
As distasteful as it is, you can't legislate good behavior. They need to nail the SOB that hit the poor guy though.
 
How do you know nobody called?

The times I have called 911, they asked me questions I couldn't have answer after passing an object at 70mph.

911: Is the car on fire?
Me: I couldn't tell because there was too much smoke.
911: How many people were in the car?
Me: I don't know. Why don't you send a cop south bound on I-65 below exit 112? I'm sure he won't miss the giant cloud of smoke coming from a vehicle on the right shoulder of the road.
 
The pedestrian was jaywalking... not that he deserved to get hit, but if you take a chance on something...

The vehicle that hit him crossed a double yellow line... crazy New England drivers...

Look up Kitty Genovese and the Bystander Effect... this kind of behavior has been studied before by Darley and Latane:
-Paradoxically, the greater the number of bystanders to witness an emergency, the less likely it is that any one of them will help (it boils down to diffusion of responsibility).
 
[quote name='BigT']The pedestrian was jaywalking... not that he deserved to get hit, but if you take a chance on something...

The vehicle that hit him crossed a double yellow line... crazy New England drivers...

Look up Kitty Genovese and the Bystander Effect... this kind of behavior has been studied before by Darley and Latane:
-Paradoxically, the greater the number of bystanders to witness an emergency, the less likely it is that any one of them will help (it boils down to diffusion of responsibility).[/QUOTE]

Very true. In CPR training, you're taught to specifically point to a bystander to call 911 rather than assume help has already been called.
 
Big T: Basically pack behavior.

If the first person doesn't stop to help, there is a better chance of the second person not stopping to help. Then, it snowballs into hundreds of people not stopping to help.

Is that about right?
 
On one hand, this disgusts me greatly and I feel this is ultimately a great metaphor for what's wrong with the world.

On the other hand, the libertarian in me disagrees with the OP, you can't punish people for choosing not to help someone in need or is hurt. The most you can do is label them assholes. You can only punish someone for doing the hurting - and inaction is not the same thing. ( Besides, we already do this by punishing everyone, through high taxes, for everyone's inaction so that the fed can supposedly attempt to "help" the impoverished, poor, and sick)

Which leads to another point, in today's messed up society, if you ran to aid such a person and ended up making things worse because of lack of skill or knowledge in first aid, there is a very real possibility of getting a lawsuit. Americans today subconsciously know and fear such things, which leads to inaction in a number of circumstances.

Edit: My first knee jerk reaction to this video was thinking "figures, total east coast mentality, glad I don't live there." Seriously, I strongly feel this would never happen where I live.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']
On the other hand, the libertarian in me disagrees with the OP, you can't punish people for choosing not to help someone in need or is hurt. You can only punish someone for doing the hurting - and inaction is not the same thing.
[/QUOTE]

I tend to agree with that. Though a part of me could see a reasonable negligence argument in a case where people do nothing and the person dies and a strong case can be made that he would have lived if an amublance go there faster, or someone did CPR (assuming a bystander was trained) etc. And again that's complicated by the lawsuit risk you bring up.

But that's a tough sell. It's sick that people didn't call for help or do anything period. But it's not a crime. People just suck these days.
 
The lawsuit idea is an interesting point, but the concept of "Good Samaritan" isn't just an ideal, it's a law. GS's are protected by the state for trying to come to another's aid, so I don't buy the "don't wanna get sued" excuse.

~HotShotX
 
[quote name='HotShotX']The lawsuit idea is an interesting point, but the concept of "Good Samaritan" isn't just an ideal, it's a law. GS's are protected by the state for trying to come to another's aid, so I don't buy the "don't wanna get sued" excuse.

~HotShotX[/QUOTE]

That is probably true. I do not know much about GS law, though. And if I don't, there is a good chance those people on the street don't either. Which compounds the problem.

Really tragic situation though. I hope someone keeps this thread updated on how that guy is doing.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']
Which leads to another point, in today's messed up society, if you ran to aid such a person and ended up making things worse because of lack of skill or knowledge in first aid, there is a very real possibility of getting a lawsuit. Americans today subconsciously know and fear such things, which leads to inaction in a number of circumstances.
[/quote]

Pretty much, the best one can do is call 911. The average citizen really lacks the skill to do anything else in that situation. Heck, despite having an MD, I'd still be pretty useless in such a situation... pretty much I can only assess the patient, try to stop any obvious sites of hemorrhage, and perhaps start chest compressions if indicated... I'd have to balance this against the risk of getting run over while kneeling in the middle of the road and exposing myself to possible communicable diseases especially if I'm out in the field as a civilian with no protective equipment (I never did like emergency medicine... leave it to the paramedics and ER docs...).
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']Edit: My first knee jerk reaction to this video was thinking "figures, total east coast mentality, glad I don't live there." Seriously, I strongly feel this would never happen where I live.[/QUOTE]

Why would the bystander effect have anything to do with where you live?

In Wichita:

As stabbing victim LaShanda Calloway lay dying on the floor of a convenience store, five shoppers, including one who stopped to take a picture of her with a cell phone, stepped over the woman, police said.
Click to expand...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/07/03/national/a131213D81.DTL

In St. Paul:

As many as 10 people witnessed a man raping and beating a woman early Tuesday in the hallway of a St. Paul apartment building, police said Wednesday.

No one stopped it.
Click to expand...

http://www.libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=198120&Disp=12&Trace=on

People are fucked up all over.
 
Yeah, I'd say that's just a typical case of "that wouldn't happen in my neck of the woods" mentality on thrust's part. People like to think bad stuff can't happen near them, but shit like that happens everywhere these days.
 
So many things wrong with that.

The immature fucks driving the cars (I assume they were together, it appeared that way) need to be castrated.

The jaywalking douche needs to not be played a victim.

The citizens should've called for help for the jaywalking douche.

Everybody's a loser.
 
[quote name='dmaul1114']Yeah, I'd say that's just a typical case of "that wouldn't happen in my neck of the woods" mentality on thrust's part. People like to think bad stuff can't happen near them, but shit like that happens everywhere these days.[/QUOTE]

No need to be a douche.

I have never heard a story like this happening around where I live, usually it's quite the opposite.


I caveat what I said with saying I am sure it's POSSIBLE for this to happen here. Just less likely.
 
I wasn't being a douche, most everyone has that view. I'd like to think it wouldn't happen around me, or around my parents who live in rural WV. But people just don't care anymore.

That said, I can't complain to much as I don't give much of a shit anymore either. I'd certainly stop and call 911 if I saw that, but I probably wouldn't stop to be a witness in a fender bender where there were clearly no injuries etc. It's just a fast paced, me first world we live in.
 
I thought that he may have been at the sidewalk or that this was a setup but it's obvious that the guy was looking to cross a really busy road. Hell, the first car looks like it swerved hitting him and the second tried to as well but was unsuccessful. Very shitty that the second car drove off though.
 
[quote name='unforeseen']That old man was jaywalking. What else do you expect?
That was the risk he took.

Sad that no one helped him though.[/quote]

I can understand if cars were swerving to miss hitting him but as you can clearly see both cars pull to the left to try to hit the guy then sped away.
 
Seeing this made my stomach turn. What the heck is wrong with us?!

In person, I'm a very backwards person socially. I don't gossip with the neighbors, I don't even know the names of anyone other than a couple next door and some of the kids next door on the other side, and that's just from crashing their ball games. But about a month back I heard what at first, I thought was one of the kids hollering, "WAHOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!! WOOOO WOOOOO WAHOOO!" After about 40 seconds it didn't sound like woops of fun, but I realized one of the kids was screaming because something was wrong.

I was not the only person at home, but I was the only friggen person in the area to go out and help him (fell off his bike and injured himself). I don't get mad at much, but this made me really upset. What's the point of anyone's life if you can't be bothered to help someone in need??!?!?
cigar.gif
cigar.gif
cigar.gif
cigar.gif
cigar.gif



ITDFX, I merged your GTA thread in here.
 
[quote name='guinaevere']


ITDEFX, I merged your GTA thread in here.[/quote]

Thanks, I didn't know weither it should be here or the OTT but the other guy beat me to it so oh well.


wow, my local news just reported this a few seconds ago as it happened last week, yet they reported it now.

They report that the guy is now paralyzed. :bomb:



10 years ago, people would have immediately jumped to help the guy out within 5 seconds of the event and there would have been others who would have chased down the drivers and stopped them until police arrived. Now a days everyone wants to be more of a "Witness" and take pics/videos with their cell phones so they can upload it on youtube to show friends. Very few people want to help out these days.


As a matter of fact about two weeks ago I was getting out of church and waiting my gf to come out of the bathroom. Apparently an elderly woman in her mid 80's slipped and fell right behind her.

The people in the area, including myself jumped to help this lady out who hit her head on the floor. She claimed her arm was broken then claim her him was broken. No one knew what to do. So we made her as comfortable as possible and I called 911. Within 5 minutes they were at the church. She did cut her wrist so she was bleeding a bit. They took her to the hospital to check her out just to be sure. Don't know what happened to her, but I am sure she is fine.

I have CPR and Epipen training and that's about it. After church was over, everyone bolted except those who needed to use the bathroom. Some people did pass by but did nothing except for about 5-6 people including myself.
 
[quote name='ITDEFX']10 years ago, people would have immediately jumped to help the guy out within 5 seconds of the event and there would have been others who would have chased down the drivers and stopped them until police arrived. Now a days everyone wants to be more of a "Witness" and take pics/videos with their cell phones so they can upload it on youtube to show friends. Very few people want to help out these days.


As a matter of fact about two weeks ago I was getting out of church and waiting my gf to come out of the bathroom. Apparently an elderly woman in her mid 80's slipped and fell right behind her.

The people in the area, including myself jumped to help this lady out who hit her head on the floor. She claimed her arm was broken then claim her him was broken. No one knew what to do. So we made her as comfortable as possible and I called 911. Within 5 minutes they were at the church. She did cut her wrist so she was bleeding a bit. They took her to the hospital to check her out just to be sure. Don't know what happened to her, but I am sure she is fine.

I have CPR and Epipen training and that's about it. After church was over, everyone bolted except those who needed to use the bathroom. Some people did pass by but did nothing except for about 5-6 people including myself.[/quote]

I'm not so sure that we were all that different 10 years ago. Many of the studies investigating the bystander effect, pluralistic ignorance, and diffusion of responsibility in such cases were done in the 1960s and 70s. Kitty Genovese was killed in the 60s and has been a staple of social psychology textbooks ever since.

People should learn compression only CPR! The old stupid classic CPR in which lay people were taught to blow into the person's mouth periodically is relatively useless and gross (making it much less likely to be used). Plus it's unnecessarily complicated for a novice to remember some arbitrary ratio of compressions to breaths, etc. Unless you have an O2 tank and Ambu bag handy, just stick to chest compressions at a relatively high rate ~100/sec...
 
Legally, there is no duty to rescue except in certain circumstances:

1. You created the harm (car driver in this scenario).
2. You're under a contractual duty, like a lifeguard or caregiver.
3. You're a parent or guardian

Contrary to popular belief, there is hardly any risk of being sued for helping someone. The only duty that vests upon the inception of a rescue is to carry out the rescue as a reasonably prudent person would. For example:

I see a kid hit by a bike and start to drive him to the ER. On the way, I get a call from my GF who wants a quicky so I kick the kid out of my car and go have a nooner. Here I didn't carry out the rescue like a reasonably prudent person would.

THe law does not want to dissuade people from helping those in need, so it is VERY difficult to win a "negligent rescuer" case. One case I remember reading about in particular is where an EMT improperly used a difibulator and burnt the shit out of a drowned person's chest. So you have to do something like this or my above hypothetical (aka, totally fuck up the rescue) to risk any liability.

K. Genovese is standard reading in any entry level psych class. I read about it in my Intro to Pysch class. It's really fucked up and made me feel quite uncomfortable and disturbed.
 
[quote name='HotShotX']Just as there is a law in action to protect Good Samaritans, there needs to be a law that punishes those who fucking do nothing and allow people to suffer. Granted, I'm not expecting them to know medical aid, but for the love of God fucking call for help.

Every last one of them need to be thrown in jail.

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/crime/2008/06/05/dnt.ct.hit.and.run.wtnh

~HotShotX[/QUOTE]fuck off. It's not your business to tell anyone what to do.
 
[quote name='ITDEFX']10 years ago, people would have immediately jumped to help the guy out within 5 seconds of the event and there would have been others who would have chased down the drivers and stopped them until police arrived. [/quote] I've been on the local Grand Jury for the past five months (this is my last month serving) and everytime we have a witness who chases down a criminal, we all get pretty vocal in support of him. Sadly, there's only about one of these instances for every 100 or so cases.

Now a days everyone wants to be more of a "Witness" and take pics/videos with their cell phones so they can upload it on youtube to show friends.
Click to expand...
That sort of behavior is so repulsive. Someone needs help, go help. If you can't go get help, and move along.

A house in my neighborhood burned down a couple years ago, all the neighbors were out there taking pictures and gawking. I just don't get that "let's stare at another person's misfortune" attitude at all.
 
I've been thinking a lot about this since yesterday, it's really affected me. It causes a lot of introspection, as it should.

Not related to this incident really, but my thought is that our society has become so litigious, that I think everyone is at least a little more hesitant these days.

It was not that long ago that if a man saw a little girl in a store that was crying because she couldn't find her parents, that man could pick her up and assure her it would be ok and help her find her parents. Not anymore, especially if you are a man, you are certainly never going to touch the kid and you are going to weigh your options for a few seconds before you decide to help.

The past few decades we have trained everyone that they could be sued into oblivion for things they would never have considered, and now we are all very skittish.

Again, not directly related to this case, there is no excuse for so much selfish ignorance in this case.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

I think people in large cities are just conditioned to believe someone else will help, so their help isn't needed. I don't think anyone who passed by the fallen jaywalker is any less a person than any of us. I remember in my psych 101 class we covered how, due to implied responsibility, you're far more likely to be helped by a single person driving down an empty highway than any of the 100's of cars driving down a busy freeway.

I know if I saw this happen on an empty residential street, I would immediately call 911. If I saw this happen in Time Square, I probably wouldn't.

I'm not excusing their inaction -- someone should have, at least, walked up to the man after they noticed nobody else had. I'm just saying it isn't as despicable as it may seem on the surface.
 
[quote name='HotShotX']The lawsuit idea is an interesting point, but the concept of "Good Samaritan" isn't just an ideal, it's a law. GS's are protected by the state for trying to come to another's aid, so I don't buy the "don't wanna get sued" excuse.[/quote]

[FONT=&quot]The Good Samaritan laws in some states only covers individuals who are certified to give aid; an uncertified person would not be protected under said laws.

[/FONT][quote name='pittpizza'] Legally, there is no duty to rescue except in certain circumstances:

1. You created the harm (car driver in this scenario).
2. You're under a contractual duty, like a lifeguard or caregiver.
3. You're a parent or guardian[/quote]

4. It's your spouse
5. They're on your property legally.
 
It's sick, and it sucks, but the "these days" comments are unfounded. A different setting may change things (less people around, or people conditioned to help strangers), but I very much doubt that the situation would be different 10, 20, 30, or 100 years ago, given a similar setting (somebody gets/is getting hurt that nobody knows, lots of people are around, not conditioned to help strangers).

Hell, if it was 60 or more years ago and a black dude that nobody knew, or maybe 150 or so years ago and some Irish guy in New England or a Chinese guy in the west it probably wouldn't even be as big of a deal, I'd think that people would be even less inclined to help than now, from their own conditioning to care less about those particular kinds of people compared to others and their fear of becoming ostracized for aiding the outgroup.

Unless you know of some sweet spot in the past where everybody cared about everybody else, you're just making shit up. People have always been this way, we were no better in the past (arguably worse, in certain cases), and I doubt we'll be any better in the future.
 
I do wonder to a degree if society getting more fast paced has affected this kind of stuff.

I know I used to be more generous with helping people waiting to hold doors for people that weren't right behind me (i.e. they were several steps back etc.) and don't much any more as I'm super busy now and always rushing to get somewhere it seems. That said, I would have stopped in the above case...but also as I said above I probably wouldn't stop to be a witness to a fender bender that happened in front of me these days as odds are I'm rushing to get somewhere, get an errand done to get back to working etc.
 
[quote name='thrustbucket']I've been thinking a lot about this since yesterday, it's really affected me. It causes a lot of introspection, as it should.

Not related to this incident really, but my thought is that our society has become so litigious, that I think everyone is at least a little more hesitant these days.

It was not that long ago that if a man saw a little girl in a store that was crying because she couldn't find her parents, that man could pick her up and assure her it would be ok and help her find her parents. Not anymore, especially if you are a man, you are certainly never going to touch the kid and you are going to weigh your options for a few seconds before you decide to help.

The past few decades we have trained everyone that they could be sued into oblivion for things they would never have considered, and now we are all very skittish.

Again, not directly related to this case, there is no excuse for so much selfish ignorance in this case.[/quote]

:applause:

I completely agree with you here.
 
Yes, a fast paced life does have an effect.

Darley and Batson showed in 1973 that seminary students who were told that they were running late for an appointment were significantly less likely to help an unconsious man along their path than those who were told that there was no rush (10% vs 63%). The fact that they were rushing to give a speech on the good samaritan did not seem to increase their likeliness to help relative to neutral speech topics.

Also, researchers have shown that people in less fast paced settings are more likely to help. E.g., you'll be more likely to get help in a small town than the city.

It's all part of Latane and Darley's bystander intervention decision tree...
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']fuck off. It's not your business to tell anyone what to do.[/quote]

Liquid, despite you being a dbag , if I saw you in that same situation, I would still try to help any way I could, whether it was to apply basic first aid or call 911.

[quote name='guinaevere']I've been on the local Grand Jury for the past five months (this is my last month serving) and everytime we have a witness who chases down a criminal, we all get pretty vocal in support of him. Sadly, there's only about one of these instances for every 100 or so cases.

That sort of behavior is so repulsive. Someone needs help, go help. If you can't go get help, and move along.

A house in my neighborhood burned down a couple years ago, all the neighbors were out there taking pictures and gawking. I just don't get that "let's stare at another person's misfortune" attitude at all.[/quote]

Some people preferred to stare and say "OH MY GOD, OH MY GOD!!!" (the cloverfield effect) and give you the SoL look.

[quote name='BigT']I'm not so sure that we were all that different 10 years ago. Many of the studies investigating the bystander effect, pluralistic ignorance, and diffusion of responsibility in such cases were done in the 1960s and 70s. Kitty Genovese was killed in the 60s and has been a staple of social psychology textbooks ever since.

People should learn compression only CPR! The old stupid classic CPR in which lay people were taught to blow into the person's mouth periodically is relatively useless and gross (making it much less likely to be used). Plus it's unnecessarily complicated for a novice to remember some arbitrary ratio of compressions to breaths, etc. Unless you have an O2 tank and Ambu bag handy, just stick to chest compressions at a relatively high rate ~100/sec...[/quote]


10 years ago we didn't have cell phones with cameras, nor did the media offer ways to send them pics of events unfolding to their servers so they can report it. I agree on the CPR part, however from what I remembered last year there are a number of first aid kits with the mouth protector. Heck even those deflibulator machines are 90% voice guidance or give you extremely easy to follow directions to use the machine. From what I was told, even someone with NO CPR training or training on the machine can use them fairly easily.

Now that I think about it with the old lady who fell in the bathroom and cut herself, well no one brought the first aid kit!!! You would think that someone would have gone to the main office and gotten one.

Anyways it all depends on where you live. I guess if this happened in NYC, you bet your ass there would have been help in seconds.
 
[quote name='ITDEFX']Liquid, despite you being a dbag , if I saw you in that same situation, I would still try to help any way I could, whether it was to apply basic first aid or call 911.[/QUOTE]I'm not saying whether or not it's right to help, I'm saying it's absolutely fucking stupid to require people to render aid.


It's like these people don't believe in individual freedom.
 
[quote name='Liquid 2']

It's like these people don't believe in individual freedom.[/QUOTE]

You'd be surprised how many people that hang out in this sub-forum don't. The entertainment value they provide is why I can't stay away.
 
[quote name='pittpizza']Legally, there is no duty to rescue except in certain circumstances:

1. You created the harm (car driver in this scenario).
2. You're under a contractual duty, like a lifeguard or caregiver.
3. You're a parent or guardian

Contrary to popular belief, there is hardly any risk of being sued for helping someone. The only duty that vests upon the inception of a rescue is to carry out the rescue as a reasonably prudent person would. For example:
.[/QUOTE]

No, you still can get sued, you're just very likely not to lose. However, you still may have to go through the time and expense of the litigation process.

For physicians it's also a little stickier. Once you render care to someone, regardless of the circumstance, you have developed a doctor-patient relationship and therefore are liable for malpractice.
 
[quote name='dopa345']No, you still can get sued, you're just very likely not to lose. However, you still may have to go through the time and expense of the litigation process.

For physicians it's also a little stickier. Once you render care to someone, regardless of the circumstance, you have developed a doctor-patient relationship and therefore are liable for malpractice.[/quote]


I think this is one of the excuses some people use when they are asked why didn't they help... "Because I don't know how to help them so I didn't want to get sued..". It's a scary thought I know. However if the that does happened (someone sues you for helping them), if you play the media right in your favor, you could have a lot of support on your side and heck a law office or a politician might take your case and help you fight it.

People should just learn basic first aid and basic CPR, while someone else calls in the professionals. They say the first few minutes of an accident can be critical to a persons life.
 
[quote name='becuzimbrown']fucking videogames.

Why aren't we banning all of them?[/quote]

Agreed. Jack Thompson said that videogames caused this. BAN THEM, I SAY!
 
[quote name='lunatic_pandora']Agreed. Jack Thompson said that videogames caused this. BAN THEM, I SAY![/quote]


but what of the pokemoz??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top