| By analyzing the reasons for the preference to kill the victim in car accidents, the writer tries to find the approaches to change the current situation in this article. The whole article is made up of three parts.In the first part, the writer combining the theoretical analysis on the regulations on compensations for personal damages in car accidents with the comparison in two specific cases happened in Shanghai,2011, finds out that such regulations may lead to the result that the compensation for an injured victim may be much higher than that for a victim killed in the car accident. Due to the long period of medical treatment and the "unlimited" medical expenses for the disabled victim, the driver would have a very heavy economic burden to compensate the victim, while in the case of death almost no or a very short treatment period. That’s the reason why many drivers have the inclination to kill rather than injure someone severely.In the second part, by studying and concluding the basic theories of the compensations for personal damages, the writer finds that most of the provisions of our law can meet the requirements of these basic theories: the full-compensation for the direct damages and the fix-sum disability compensation and death compensation due to the current economic situation of our country. No change to the compensating methods to these can obviously change the preference to kill the victim. Only some changes can be made to the provision of mental damages. However, the changes cannot obviously change the inclination to kill rather than injure someone severely.In the third part, the writer tries to build a multi-dimension remedy system by innovation the compulsory insurance for automotive vehicles, medical insurance and the way of payment of compensations to reduce the economic burden on the drivers, to the extent that the victim’s damages have been effectively remedied, so that the drivers will not make immoral choices due to potential financial pressure. |
PDF Full Text Request