German Motorists Could Be Prosecuted for Braking for Animals

[Jim O.]

I guess the next logical step would be not braking for toddlers and small children, they're small objects and can be run over without danger.


http://www.anc.org/pets/pets_article.cfm?identifier=2003_0804_motorists



by Sherry Morse

Posted on August 4, 2003



A recent ruling in Germany informed motorists that if they brake for small animals, they could lose their insurance claims and even be prosecuted for dangerous driving.

The news came from a court case involving a 71-year-old driver who caused an accident by braking sharply to avoid a Dachshund who ran in front of his car.

The driver of the car behind him was unable to avoid hitting the stopped vehicle and sued over the damage done to his car.


The judge in the case said, "According to the rules of the road, emergency stops are normally only allowed when the driver or other road users are in serious danger. This risk does not include a Dachshund running across the road because such a small dog can be run over without any danger."

The ruling has been harshly criticized by animal rights activists and dog lovers for trivializing the lives of small animals.


Jutta Siebers of the Federal Animal Protection League said, "I am outraged and saddened by this judgment. The judge missed the fact that an animal is much more than just an object."

The judge's ruling applies not only to dogs and cats, but to wild animals such as foxes, squirrels, badgers, and small deer.


Sources
Ananova
www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_735663.html
German motorists told not to brake to save a dachshund


© 2003 Animal News Center, Inc.

[mouse]

I would think/hope that this ruling will not become a general rule; I believe Germany has a relatively good record with respect to animal protection matters.

[That Alpaca Guy]

This sickens me. I'd like to say I see both sides, but I just don't.
This is insane.

[Loki]

Apparently, this rule applies in England as well. I stopped for a cat when i was driving, and my sister, hwo wa salso in the car told me that it was illegal. I said "What am i supposed to do? Run it over?" the answer to such a question is "Yes"

[chiaraluna]

I would rather just be prosecuted than not brake for an innocent animal...

[cookingVeg]

I think that common sense dictates that you should not endanger your own life or the life of a person driving behind you by stopping for an animal. I mean, if you're alone on a country road and a dog runs in front of you, of course you should try to stop. But if you're on a highway and stopping could cause an accident, you shouldn't stop.

[muppetcow]

I'll take prosecution over running over a dachsund or a cat or a fox any day. Running over an animal would cause much more damage to me and the other drivers than would an accident caused by me braking b/c I would freak out and probably end up driving into oncoming traffic.

I would accept that the accident was my fault, though, and pay the higher insurance premiums b/c of it.

[Cissy]

I would brake for animals if I drove, unless it endangered my life or the lives of other drivers - that's basically my family's policy on it.

[Kamila]

I think this is the policy where I live. I have been told that a driver can be ticketed for breaking for an animal and causing an accident. The driver can then turn around and sue the dog owner for failing to control their pet.

Yeish, legalese.

[Lothar M Kirsch]

Cissy, that´s what I also do. You cannot endanger a family with two kids to save a squirrel. But recently while driving I suddenly realized that a instinctively wheeled my car to the left not to drive over an animal without first checking for the safety of others and myself. That made me think. Loki told us, how it´s in the UK, but how about the U.S. or Australia to name only two countries.

[Loki]

You know, i'm not the only one. I saw a cat in the middle of the road, when i was walking, and some guy stopped for it. I think most people will stop for animals, regardless of whether the law allows it or not. Including me.

[Jim O.]

I think it's all stupid. I would brake for any animal I would see crossing the road in any situation because it would just be a reaction for me. I can't tell you how many times I've seen animals scurry in front of me and me stopping and swerving with traffic oncoming and behind me because it all happened so fast that I didn't have a chance to think, only react

[Jim O.]

*contemplates just riding bike everywhere as to not harm any animals and to not go to jail for involuntary actions preventing harm to animals*

[Lothar M Kirsch]

The German motorist´s association ADAC sent this e-mail to me

da Sie nur verkehrsbedingt bremsen dürfen und von den genannten Tieren
aufgrund deren Größe für Ihr Fahrzeug und Sie keine Gefährdung bei einem
Zusammenstoß ausgeht, dürften Sie für diese Tiere nicht bremsen, wenn Dritte
dadurch gefährdet werden.

Sie würden dann für einen eventuelle Auffahrunfallhaften, Ihre eigenen
Kaskoversicherung würde z.B, beim Ausweichen eine Schadenregulierung
verweigern, da sie ein Ausweichen als grob fahrlässig ansehen würde.

Breaking for small animals is illegal, because they are no risk for your safety. Of course you can break any time, if you don´t risk other (human!) traffic participants. The insurance wouldn´t pay for damages after breaking for a cat.
Sad, but that´s the way it is.