Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="spokyone"][quote user="Bucyrus"]  Granted, the law requires this vigilance on the part of drivers, but if a motorist runs into an obstruction that is hard to see, the law tends to at least partly blame the obstruction. It is true that the crossbucks and signage at a grade crossing is reflectorized, but the visibility of these items only tells a driver that a grade crossing is there.  So the reflectorized warning of the signage is irrelevant if a driver does not see a train and therefore perceives the crossing to be clear.[/quote]I disagree with your conclusion. The perception of a clear crossing does not alter the fact that is was not clear.[/quote]I agree that it does not alter that fact, but all a driver has to go on is perception, and the FRA has declared that the perception of trains at night can be difficult for drivers.  I am just agreeing with them.With regard to the legal outcome, I must clarify that the crossing example that I gave where I believe the railroad would be partly negligent in the case of a vehicle hitting a stopped train does not apply to this Friendship, WI crash because that crossing had a stop sign.  There is no excuse for not seeing a reflectorized stop sign preceded by an advance reflectorised warning sign, and no excuse for running that stop sign.  The evidence of this crash suggests that the driver did not stop for the stop sign.  If a driver were to stop at a crossing that was occupied by a train, either moving or standing, it is very unlikely that the driver would proceed after stopping and run into that train.  So I have no idea what the legal outcome of this Friendship crash will be, but it seems like the driver was completely at fault.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag