I was going to drop my kid off at school when a dog ran between two cars and my back tire ran over a portion of the dog. I slowed down and stopped not knowing what to do and watched the dog hop up and hobble away into an adjoining back yard. What seemed to be the owner followed the dog into the back yard. I immediately pulled over but had to roll up my windows as my dog was riding along. I waited a few houses away not really knowing how to react and asking my kid what she thought I should do. When the dog quickly wandered off she wasn’t sure how I should act either.
What do I do? My initial hesitancy is tied to the dog quickly walking away into what looked like it’s home and the owner slowly following it away. I’m concerned of getting into the middle of a highly emotional situation if the dog needs to go to the vet. If the dog lay lifeless I would have had no issue with getting out and consoling as needed. Is there a difference? I think also am concerned I’ll get told I’m responsible and need to help cover any vet costs.
You stop and talk to the owner.
Maybe the owner didn’t know what happened, maybe the dog had internal injuries that it’s not presenting and needs to go to the vet.
The rest is secondary, an animal’s life is worth more then an insurance claim.
I plan on going back by later today.
That’s a day too late, should have been immediately.
Hopefully the dog is okay.
Can’t change the past, only decide what to do in the future. I agree that it should have been done straight away but perfect shouldn’t be the enemy of good, going back to check up on it is better than not doing anything.
If you hit someone’s dog and you see that someone you have a responsibility to stop and let the owner know what happened, not debate with your child for a while and go home to post on a forum.
The dog could easily be bleeding out internally and time may be of the essence.
Did you actually read Pelicanen’s reply? They’re not disagreeing with you. I don’t disagree either. The point they’re making is that it’s better late than never. Obviously doing the right thing in the first place is best, no one is saying otherwise.
Edit: if you’re trying to argue that returning ‘later today’, as OP claims to plan to do, is too slow/late then that’s a fair argument. That’s not what your comment reads like though.
This is the part I disagree with.
Stopping, debating with to do with the child then going home to post on Lemmy is ridiculous.
Also OP had their own dog, I wonder what they would do if the situation was reversed.
Again, I don’t think your actually understanding what is being said. Yes, that is ridiculous. We agree. However what has been done has already been done.
Time as we humans experience it moves only in one direction. We can not go back to change that. Time travel does not exist. So the question is what should be done going forward.
Attempting even the least harm reduction, while inferior to avoiding harm altogether, is better than no harm reduction. Should OP have done much better? Yes. Should they do something now rather than nothing at all? Also yes.
Thanks for the brief history of time, Stephen Hawking.
I absolutely agree. The right thing to do here is the hard and scary thing, but it is still the right thing. And the right thing is clear.
The thing that really gets me is the parent asking the child what the right move is. Fuck.
Everyone agrees. But that shit happened, and you are talking to OP in the now, not the past.
Almost all commenters, and especially everyone in this chain has agreed that stopping is the right thing to do. We’ve cleared that. It’s settled business. Now what happens next? The right choice is to go back as soon as possible.
If you go back, this random internet stranger is proud of you.
And by the way. You ARE responsible and need to help cover the vet bills.
For the law alone, you damaged another person’s property.
From the moral standpoint, you insured someone’s pet, a living being. You have absolutely a moral obligation to take responsibility.
And as a parent, you have a moral obligation to teach your children to take responsibility for your actions and mistakes. Even if it cost you.
It is the owners responsibility to keep the dog out of the road. There is zero legal or moral responsibility to cover any vet bills.
The only property damage that would even be considered is damage to the vehicle, which requires stopping, calling the police to file an accident report and then reporting the accident with documented damage to the car insurance company.
Legally the dog owner is responsible.
Financially the dog owner is responsible.
Morally the dog owner is responsible for their pets wellbeing.
How could you get it so backwards? The dog owner failed to keep their dog safe and under control.
deleted by creator
What an insane take.