I was going to drop my kid off at school when a dog ran between two cars and my back tire ran over a portion of the dog. I slowed down and stopped not knowing what to do and watched the dog hop up and hobble away into an adjoining back yard. What seemed to be the owner followed the dog into the back yard. I immediately pulled over but had to roll up my windows as my dog was riding along. I waited a few houses away not really knowing how to react and asking my kid what she thought I should do. When the dog quickly wandered off she wasn’t sure how I should act either.
What do I do? My initial hesitancy is tied to the dog quickly walking away into what looked like it’s home and the owner slowly following it away. I’m concerned of getting into the middle of a highly emotional situation if the dog needs to go to the vet. If the dog lay lifeless I would have had no issue with getting out and consoling as needed. Is there a difference? I think also am concerned I’ll get told I’m responsible and need to help cover any vet costs.
You are responsible. You hit someone’s dog with your car. It’s your fault their dog is now injured, potentially significantly so. That dog may die because of you. And yet you think you aren’t responsible? Someone is probably very concerned about how their dog is suddenly injured and may be dying, but instead of apologizing and offering to pay the vet bill, you’re on Lemmy basically asking us if it’s okay if you hit-and-run someone’s pet. Hell, I don’t know what the income is in your area, but if the vet bill is too high then they may have to put the dog down because they can’t afford care.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
Also, how the fuck does a dog run out from between two cars and get hit by your back tire?
The answer to your last question should tell you why everything you wrote above it is fucking awful.
If you’re driving safely and an unleashed dog sprints into the road and goes under your car from the side, what the hell do you think you would do to avoid it?
It’s the owner’s responsibility and fault, not OPs
If you’re driving safely, then you can see the dog coming.
If you don’t have line of sight to places where animals or children might be coming from, then driving safely means slowing way down.
Nope.
If you’re driving at 60kph / 37mph (60kph is a standard speed limit in residential areas here, not sure about the limits where you are), people and kids and dogs can sometimes be on the side walks. There can also be cars parked on the side of the road.
You can be as safe as is reasonably possible, but if something shorter than a parked car sprints out at full speed, into the side of your car, what are you going to do?
Yes be aware of your surroundings, yes drive at a speed where you can stop in a reasonable distance for almost anything that can occur in front of you in that environment. But no, not every single thing is avoidable
And most importantly - leash your fucking dogs
If you’re driving 37 mph next to parked cars, you’re going too fast.
In my neighborhood, next to parked cars, I go about 20 mph.
I’m going to stop. Which I can do because I’m going slow enough to do so.
It’s not a complex concept.
At 20mph, if something sprints into the SIDE of your car and under you back wheel, you’re not going to stop in time.
You don’t have precognition or superhuman reactions (and even if you did have the reactions of an F1 driver, physics are still going to happen). I applaud your approach to safety but your overconfidence is confusing.
At 20 mph you have time between when the space in front of a car becomes visible and the time your back wheel comes to match that point, to stop the car.
There is a speed at which you can see and respond to the thing that’s trying to dive under your car. That’s the whole model.
You’re watching as new spaces becomes visible as your position with regard to obstacles changes. As soon as you can detect there’s someone unexpected in front of that car, you can stop.
20 mph ≈ 29 fps
Not arguing with the majority of what you said, but speed limit is maximum safe speed in perfect conditions. (At least here in the usa).
You are both expected and required to go slower depending on conditions.
Reduced sight lines means imperfect conditions and as such you are supposed to slow down.
That’s a good point, we had road safety ads and signs saying that the speed limit is not a target: drive to the conditions.
I would have gone into more detail about the type of roads that are signed at 60kph, 50kph and 40kph here, and the expected hazards on each etc. But at the end of the day, you aren’t going to slow down to car-park speeds for every parked car you go past, that would be making yourself more of a danger for other traffic.
And if you look at the reaction speed / velocity / distance travelled calculations I mention further down, you’ll never be driving slow enough to avoid a fast and low surprise side-incursion like a sprinting dog from between parked cars.
Safe driving limits the amount of hazards that would be unavoidable, but it doesn’t eliminate them.
All so very true.
One more bit of devils advocate though lol.
Slower driving would also give more time for the other ‘party’ to react and adjust as well / potentially limit the injuries sustained.
But realistically yeah it doesn’t make a difference because licenses are way to easy to get and keep (again usa - other countries may differ) and american drivers pretty much all have their heads up their asses 24/7.
100%. It’s all about minimising risk, my tone with my other comments probably came across a bit harsh. But that fucker was telling someone it was all their fault. And that when they drive, there’s literally nothing that they couldn’t stop in time for.
They were so confidently incorrect it was annoying the shit outta me
My other kid had a good perspective. He said if our dog ran out into the road unleashed we wouldn’t expect anything out of a driver who hits the dog.