If you accidentally hit a parked car, is the right thing to do to run or to confess?

[AdamCrock]

I would be confessing - that is just how I roll .... "Sorry old boy it seems that I have accidentaly trashed up Your car ! I am so very sorry....." I know I know I would be beaten but still confessing is better for Your soul - I could not stand sitting in my house after this and constantly thinking about how "I've totalled" that car Confession is the right choice

 

[Bamspeedy]

No bumps on parked car, don't bother telling anyone.

Or you think there is no bumps and leave. The guy did get your plates and then tells the cop you hit his car in a different spot than where you did. You aren't believable because you fled the scene.

I can think of no situation in which it's appropriate to hit & run.

Someone for whatever reason is chasing you with a gun and shooting at you? Improbable, I know, but it is one situation.

 

[Borachio]

You're on your way to the hospital with your pregnant wife might be another.

Civil insurrection and general mayhem? Anyone stopping to report a minor bump?

 

[Synobun]

Someone for whatever reason is chasing you with a gun and shooting at you? Improbable, I know, but it is one situation.

I would hazard a guess that dealing with an insurance company is at the bottom of your list of things to care about if someone is trying to kill you.

Just a guess, though. Could be wrong. I hear insurance companies in America are pretty intimidating.

 

[AdamCrock]

Funny how those "improbable" situations alwys happen .... Maybe Murphy's law applies ! I think Murphy was a genius !

 

[Borachio]

Mathematician Augustus De Morgan wrote on June 23, 1866:[2] "The first experiment already illustrates a truth of the theory, well confirmed by practice, what-ever can happen will happen if we make trials enough." In later publications "whatever can happen will happen" occasionally is termed "Murphy's law," which raises the possibility—if something went wrong—that "Murphy" is "De Morgan" misremembered.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy's_law

 

[El_Machinae]

If someone hit my car failure to confess would feed my anger far more then confession

Perfection nailed the actual objection to the OP's reasoning.
Coming out of the parking lot and finding a dent in your car is aggravating. This is especially true because there is a strong social convention (laws, even. But this goes beyond laws) saying that you're supposed to leave your contact information.

 

[AdamCrock]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murphy's_law

Ahhh.... De Morgan was a genious as well , there is no doubt about that

 

[Perfection]

Perfection nailed the actual objection to the OP's reasoning.
Coming out of the parking lot and finding a dent in your car is aggravating. This is especially true because there is a strong social convention (laws, even. But this goes beyond laws) saying that you're supposed to leave your contact information.

An important thing add here is that this social convention/laws is the case even when the driver is not at fault.

Even if the driver is not at fault, by the social conventions (the rules of the road - both informal and legal) the driver still has a duty to inform the owner of damaged vehicle.

 

[Akka]

It's pretty obvious the right thing is to confess. It's not even up to discussion.
Now, what would people actually do, that's another thing entirely...

No offense, but it may lead to having to pay for something that is entirely an accident. I would not exact restitution if MY car was wrecked, but that's just me.

That's one of the most childish and stupid reasonning I ever seen...
"it's not my fault because I didn't do it on purpose !"
Wow, do people above ten actually say that ?
Not doing something on purpose means you actually didn't do it and it happened by itself ?

/facepalm

 

[Rashiminos]

Confess and pray the victim is reasonable if the damage is only superficial and minor.

 

[AdamCrock]

This does not change the thing that our car is wrecked and we need someone to be burned at the stake fot this !

 

[Darkflight]

When I was 9 or 10, I ran my bicycle into the bumper of a parked car, and even at that age I knew the right thing to do was find the owner and tell them what happened even if I only hit the bumper and it didn't have any mark on it whatsoever.

This is common sense. You damaged something you didn't own, and you should confess and pay for whatever damages have been done. If it is intentional or not is irrelevant in nearly all situations.

 

[Hygro]

Yup. I just wonder how much of my disgust in this case is merely the result of a strongly enforced social norm, and how much of it is a genuine moral response.

I wonder these things a lot.

 

[Borachio]

Doesn't it depend on how much you value these material things, like your car? And doesn't how much you value your car depend on how much work it took you to earn enough to buy your car?

And doesn't that depend in turn on how much you resent the work that you had to do to earn that money?

If instead, you would work whether you were paid or not, and that you would value your work in itself, wouldn't that mean you wouldn't resent the work you had to do to get the car (which incidentally you need primarily to get you to work in the first place), and wouldn't that mean that you wouldn't be so bothered if someone damaged your precious car?

At least, maybe not to the point of outrage?

 

[timtofly]

Ever heard of No Fault Insurance?

 

[Borachio]

Yes. I've heard it.

I've heard of no fault divorce, too.

I'm all in favour of both.

 

[El_Machinae]

I've heard of no fault divorce, too.

I'm all in favour of both.

How do you enact this favouring? Endeavour to be a serial divorcee? Encourage people to do it? Sabotage relationships 'evenly'?

 

[Borachio]

I understand your confusion. Let me see if I can clear it up.

I'm in favour of no fault divorce for people who are getting divorced anyway. I've seen too many acrimonious divorces to be in favour of anything else.

And if you get married you accept the consequences. Don't you?

As far as I can tell marriage breakdown is always six of one, half a dozen of the other. It takes two to make, or break, a marriage.

That's not to say some partners don't grievously abuse the other, though.

 

[Akka]

Doesn't it depend on how much you value these material things, like your car? And doesn't how much you value your car depend on how much work it took you to earn enough to buy your car?

And doesn't that depend in turn on how much you resent the work that you had to do to earn that money?

If instead, you would work whether you were paid or not, and that you would value your work in itself, wouldn't that mean you wouldn't resent the work you had to do to get the car (which incidentally you need primarily to get you to work in the first place), and wouldn't that mean that you wouldn't be so bothered if someone damaged your precious car?

At least, maybe not to the point of outrage?

That reasoning is false.
There is plenty of things that you don't resent work for (like putting efforts in your hobbies which, by definition, you found pleasurable), and you'd be just as much (if not more) upset if they were wrecked than if it was your worldly possession.

Just ruin the most-beloved painting of an artist and see how your "hey, you had fun while doing it, so you're not going to be mad if it's destroyed" flies.