Maybe it is a matter of defining victim?
Ok, IF none of the accidents are my fault, that makes me the victim. So I must be to blame for the accidents because I chose to purchase and drive a car?
Ok, but isn't the guilty party the one who should be held accountable for any injuries sustained by others? Is the victim partly to blame because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, or some such?
As for auto accidents, there is a reason the Insurance Companies and Law Enforcement came up with "No Fault" accidents. This happens when both parties are equaly responsible, right? Fault can not be blamed on either, for both are equally guilty?
But then, neither would be a "victim" either..........![]()
it is a matter of defining victim?
Victim as defined in the OP.
Ok, IF none of the accidents are my fault, that makes me the victim. So I must be to blame for the accidents because I chose to purchase and drive a car?![]()
Do not understand.
Ok, but isn't the guilty party the one who should be held accountable for any injuries sustained by others? Is the victim partly to blame because they were in the wrong place at the wrong time, or some such?
It all is on a case by case situation.
As for auto accidents, there is a reason the Insurance Companies and Law Enforcement came up with "No Fault" accidents. This happens when both parties are equaly responsible, right? Fault can not be blamed on either, for both are equally guilty?
But then, neither would be a "victim" either..........![]()
If equally responsible then both are at fault. Both are the perpetrator.