The cause of the traffic accident on Taizhou Road and Bridge on May 17 has been identified: after a professional inspection, the accident has nothing to do with the Tesla brand vehicle itself; the police found that the driver Chen Moulong was fully responsible.

According to a report from the Taizhou Municipal Public Security Bureau, at about 17:15 on May 17, Chen Moulong drove a Tesla brand car while passing through the viaduct of the 104 West Double Line at Luqiao Luoyang Street and collided with two police officers who were on the scene. A police officer has unfortunately died on duty after the rescue failed, and another injured police officer is now out of danger.

After the accident, the Taizhou police conducted comprehensive on-site surveys, investigations and inquiries in accordance with laws and regulations, and entrusted a third-party professional organization to inspect and appraise the vehicle that caused the accident. After testing and appraisal, the performance of the vehicle is normal, and the accident has nothing to do with the Tesla brand vehicle itself. The police found that the driver Chen Moulong drove illegally and was fully responsible for the accident.

It was originally an “unremarkable” traffic accident, but because it was named Tesla. Become a highly anticipated event. According to the results of the survey, the human factor is true. Others are false. A normal interrogation can actually tell the truth. Whether the driver stepped on the accelerator to escape deliberately can be asked with a little bit of brain during the interrogation. In other words, even if there is a problem with the Tesla vehicle, it is not an excuse for the driver’s subjective intention to escape or hit someone. As far as the case is concerned, whether the driver Chen Moulong drove illegally or not was the root cause of the accident in this case. If there is a problem with the vehicle and the driver’s subjective consciousness does not want to escape or hit people, then the driver will definitely bite to death. There is a problem with the vehicle and I think the brakes will not stop! ——Remember the reaction of those drivers whose vehicles could not stop braking? A female car owner in Henan defended her rights and yelled that the brakes failed. Owners of out-of-control cars have to defend their rights while lying in the hospital. Therefore, they subjectively did not want to have a car accident, but the vehicle went out of control against their subjective consciousness (regardless of whether it was a misoperation or not). In contrast to this case, the driver Chen Moulong did not hysterically say that there is a problem with the vehicle like other car owners. I don’t want to… Therefore, there is such a result, but it is a normal phenomenon. When a traffic accident occurs, the traffic police is responsible according to the traffic law, and there is nothing wrong with it.

zhiwo

By zhiwo

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
11 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
helpmekim
7 months ago

A lawyer friend of mine said that once, a client came to consult and changed a TOTO high-end toilet at home, and then he kept constipation. This person suspected that TOTO had used some black technology to cause his constipation. He planned to sue this Japanese company and consult this. How to fight the lawsuit. The lawyer friend’s real idea is to let Ah go to the hospital to have a look at his brain, but he can’t say it directly, he can only evade that he is not familiar with toilet and constipation, and this lawsuit cannot be handled. Just let the other person go and I asked, don’t you make money if you have money? My friend said that for this little money, he became a laughing stock. Forget it, either you go?

heloword
7 months ago

Wait and see for the time being, I’m not sure if it’s a fish one after another… the way to eat fish is like this: the fish is half-cooked, put it in the pot, eat the meat in the pot first, and then eat the shabu-shabu. Put potatoes in the bone pot and eat a wave of fish bone soup and a complete set of food experience with rice. The way to eat news is like this: Tesla collided with the traffic police official investigation and the car did not turn off. The owner came out and said that Tesla has The problem Tesla denied that the media followed up with the official clarification for a while and then the media digs into the topic…Although it was ultimately nothing, but the media made a lot of money, and the masses were contented to eat melons and passed the boring time. Everyone is satisfied…

helpyme
7 months ago

This is a guess on Zhihu at that time. Gao Zan mostly analyzes whether it is an assisted driving problem based on rumors that car owners are playing mobile phones. In fact, it was the owner of the car that had not run away at the time, and there was no problem with the car. Because, even if Tesla claims to be self-driving, the official statement is still assisted driving. So even if there is a problem with assisted driving at the time, this function is still normal, and the car is also normal. After all, it is assisted driving, not automatic driving in the true sense, so problems are foreseeable, even not a small probability. If there is a high probability that there is no problem, isn’t it true autonomous driving? In other words, the current answer is that the car owner is legally solely responsible, and there is no problem with the quality of the car. This was already known at the time of discussion. As a result, I looked at the carnival and avoided talking about it, as if everyone accused Tesla of brake failure. Occasionally there were a few doubts, pointing out that the discussion at that time did not say anything about braking. Most of the respondents were talking about assisted driving. As a result, they were put on the hat of a new style of play. Changed to the feeling of assisted driving. This kind of ignoring the objective facts and purely confusing the audience makes it hard for people not to think it is a navy.

sina156
7 months ago

As I have already emphasized in my previous answer, the conclusions of the so-called real-hammer Tesla brake failures on the Internet are not credible. Basically, they are shooting videos that are taken out of context, either to discredit or open their mouths. I have repeatedly emphasized that we must have an authoritative report from an authoritative organization before we can draw a conclusion! No, the authoritative report of the authoritative organization is here. As for whether you are still willing to believe in your subjective consciousness, or you are still willing to believe in those self-media, official reports, it is there-in black and white.

yahoo898
7 months ago

I have seen some people say that the driver was playing with a mobile phone before the accident. If it is true, then it is very likely that the driver has turned on Tesla’s so-called “autonomous driving” or “fully autonomous driving.” The important question of whether the driver has turned on the so-called “autonomous driving” or “fully autonomous driving” is not stated. Besides, it only says that the driver is “violating laws and regulations”, why dare you not say such “violations of laws and regulations”? In the past, the police announced that the driver was “violating laws and regulations”, at least whether it was drunk driving, drug driving or fatigue driving, speeding and overloading, or illegally changing lanes and overtaking, etc., right? The most despicable and shameless thing about Ma Da Huyou and Tesla’s special chicken thieves is that they high-profile a large truck that has been confronted with straight and hard in front of them, cement isolation piers, police cars parked on the side of the road, and low speed driving. Falsely boasting that fraudulent propaganda packages are packaged as “autonomous driving” or “fully autonomous driving”, and what else to achieve “L5 autonomous driving” within this year? Even openly released or praised videos of Tesla doing other things on the Internet, which seriously misled consumers, causing some fans who lack basic scientific literacy and common sense of engineering technology to think that Martha Fudge and Tesla are really realized. In order to achieve autonomous driving, the personal safety of yourself and other traffic participants is entrusted to this kind of error-prone “automatic driving”, while the inconspicuous manual says that assisted driving completely clears its own responsibilities, making the ignorant horse fan. After the special fan was tricked into driving illegally, Tesla could not be held accountable at all, and all responsibilities must be taken on his own. Such shameless capitalists and car companies with no moral bottom line are no different from crooks.

leexin
7 months ago

This problem itself shows that Tesla’s brakes have become a phenomenon-level topic because of its crisis management attitude and methods. It has established considerable potential and has become a label that has successfully penetrated into the minds of consumers. People are never rational. On this issue, “Thinking: Fast and Slow” puts forward an interesting point. There are two systems for human thinking. The first is a low-energy daily system used to process daily judgments and operations based on common sense, such as driving, walking, and eating. The second system is a high-energy thinking system, used to deal with complex problems, such as playing chess, buying durable consumer goods, answering questions in Zhihu codewords, etc. When Tesla couldn’t stop the brakes and successfully penetrated into people’s minds through various news, these people instinctively activated the system for relevant thinking and judgment when they saw similar problems. Therefore, when the result does not match the judgment, there will even be more doubts. I personally believe that the traffic police’s judgment is based on facts. But this matter has nothing to do with Tesla itself, so the result is of no significance in judging whether there is a problem with Tesla itself.

greatword
7 months ago

Let the bullet fly again, looking forward to a detailed report on the restoration of what happened. The original text stated that “The police found that the driver Chen Moulong was driving illegally and illegally and was fully responsible for the accident.” Who said that the brake failure was now ruled out, but it was caused by the owner’s improper operation. But there is another question here is whether the car owner uses assisted driving. For example, if a car owner uses assisted driving but his hands are not on the steering wheel (or he fails to brake in time) and causes a collision, can it be considered illegal driving?

loveyou
7 months ago

It shows that not all of Tesla’s accidents are due to brake failure, and there are other reasons. Isn’t this common sense? No matter how bad the brake system is, it is impossible for all accidents to be caused by the failure of the brake system, unless the car has no brake system at all. The previous evaluation video has basically confirmed that there is a problem with Tesla’s braking logic. For the special fan, many car owners who were killed by the brake failure were also loyal special fans during their lives. It turned out to be a “die loyal fan”. As the saying goes, good words are hard to persuade damn ghosts, and those who have been sold to help people with money can persuade them. If he doesn’t listen to persuasion and wants to bite you back, I suggest you treat him a little bit further, to persuade him to be kind, and not to persuade him is his duty. Tesla Public Relations is very good at using the group polarization effect to force the generation of diehard fans through negative news, that is, the “fanquan abusive and solid powder” routine of Fanquan. It is difficult for people who have not studied social psychology to understand Tesla’s very hidden tricks.

strongman
7 months ago

Thank you for the invitation of this dear friend. It is estimated that I have read another answer to my guess about the cause of the accident. First of all, what is certain is that the previous part of Zhihu guessed that Tesla’s brake failure caused the accident to be stopped. Unfortunately, my previous answer does not hold the above view. My view is that the owner did not observe the road conditions after using Tesla’s assisted driving, and at the same time, the assisted driving system made some kind of error and caused the collision. ”After testing and appraisal, the vehicle performance is normal. ”It does not prove that the assisted driving system is normal. On the one hand, the detection of accident vehicles usually does not include the detection of driving assistance systems; on the other hand, even if the auxiliary systems are checked, the recurrence rate of such failures is very low. The determination of the owner’s full responsibility is very correct, because the current laws and regulations do not allow the driver to completely rely on the driving assistance system. But is the car okay? From the normal logic that the designer hopes, the driving assistance system cannot hit people. Even the most difficult-to-prevent ghost probes need to do their best to avoid accidents. But in this accident, the driving assistance system (if turned on) If it is), it is obvious that the traffic police ahead is not recognized. If the driver assistance system is not turned on, then at least AEB has to recognize it and apply emergency braking. Of course, if the owner of the vehicle is driving at a speeding speed, causing AEB to have no time to respond, then there is no report in this regard. (Brain guessing: Is it possible that Tesla identified the reflective vest on the traffic police as a reflective strip on the cone, because when driving at high speeds suddenly found someone in front or a cone, the processing logic of the system must be different ) In general, there is no problem with the driver’s full responsibility, but whether there is any problem with the Tesla car, I am skeptical anyway. After all, new things are developing too fast. Some people eat crabs, while others eat spiders. By the way, before the driver is convicted of intentional homicide, please do not speculate on others with the utmost malice. Those who hold the view that the driver deliberately bumped into someone, based on the current missing information, personally think it is inappropriate.

stockin
7 months ago

In general, when accidents occur, most people first think of errors in driving licenses, drunk driving, and speeding. Few people think that it is the problem of the car itself. The mechanical structure of the car itself has been developed for so many years, and it has given most people a sense of security. Even if it is really caused by the car itself, it is generally due to a cause, such as illegal modification. There are structural problems, such as broken-arm tiger, patching, oil leakage 888, most car companies will also correct, recall vehicles, or change the structure of the next generation, but few car companies dare to stand up and point to consumption The consumers’ noses scolded, and even accused consumers of “not knowing how to drive” and threatened to “take an exam” before buying their own car. This is simply a big issue in the world. Now major car companies are implementing intelligence and intelligence. Ease of use allows more consumers to enjoy the convenience and speed brought by technological advancement. However, no matter what kind of high-tech, the foundation is always safety, especially for cars. Smart phones are only replaced when they break. In one, you are sitting in a high-speed car, and you have lost control of the vehicle. I am afraid that you can only pray for reincarnation. Then why do so many people think that the tsl accident is a tsl problem? Because of inertial thinking-Tesla has gone from tens of thousands of people to a car that is difficult to determine and now sales are cut in half. Being arrogant and rude to consumers is one aspect, and the safety of its own system is also part of the elusiveness. No brand can ridicule for a long time. The masses fooled the masses on one side, even if they fudged for a while, the masses later realized that the price of arrogance and rudeness must be borne by the brand itself.

11
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x