Due to enduring the Kafkaesque situation of having two accidents in 30 minutes, one involving an accident with an ambulance, I would like to share my personal experience. Both cases show the loopholes of Taiwanese law, which is a driving factor for the terrible traffic conditions in the nation.
I was driving my scooter on the main road in Taoyuan’s Yangmei District (楊梅). Despite there being no cars behind me, a young man in an old car made a sudden left turn and I bumped into his vehicle. At first, the man tried to run away, but was blocked by other cars. My blood and flesh started immediately to color the paving while the young man was preoccupied with his cellphone. Other people stopped, put me down and tried to stop the bleeding until the ambulance arrived a few minutes later. Some people were very helpful with first aid and traffic control — not the young man playing with his cellphone.
The ambulance drove at a low speed with flashing lights on a four-lane road. When the ambulance slowly turned left, it was hit by another scooter. It was unthinkable that the other young man could not see it. He just considered his time to be more valuable. Bleeding and in pain, I had to wait for another ambulance while the second man was keeping the first ambulance busy. Time is relative and it passes more slowly when you are bleeding and in pain.
I stayed in the hospital for three weeks, but might recover in three months. My leg was at risk even after two operations and daily painful bandage changes. My wife and kids had no life during those few weeks, because they had to come to the hospital every day. The first man was not really under pressure, and he even asked my wife if we can help him to repair his car. He told us that he has no money for damages. The second guy was never seen again.
Why can both men enjoy such stoicism? Because they simply do not face any legal or financial risks.
A person who negligently causes injury to another shall be sentenced to prison for not more than one year, short-term imprisonment, or a fine of not more than NT$100,000 under Article 284 of the Criminal Code. The first man in practice would be charged with NT$20,000 as a first-time offender. He could excuse himself by saying that he was shocked, so he made the wrong decision when he tried to run. It would be very difficult to prove that he stopped due to traffic conditions. Civil litigation is not feasible and not enforceable — he could work off the record to avoid the enforcement of a judgement. From a financial point of view, it is much better for him to object to negotiations with me, and accept the sentence of NT$20,000 to NT$30,000 instead of paying damages. Obviously, he found that advice on the Internet.
The second man? Nothing. In other countries, he might lose his driving license for a very long time. If he said that he did not see the ambulance with lights and a horn, he would prove himself to be unqualified for driving a scooter. I do not even mention his selfish and childish attitude when he prioritized saving time over the life of a person in an ambulance. Imagine if I had a heart attack or a stroke. Ten minutes could have meant life or death.
Actually, I often see drivers blocking ambulances, which is surprising for a developed country like Taiwan. It is a very developed country with nice people, but the traffic conditions are terrible and more comparable to Somalia.
There are two reasons European drivers are much better than Taiwanese drivers: Heavy fines and strict law enforcement.
Risky driving is just too expensive in Europe.
Taiwan has to increase the penalties to a level that really hurts. Cars should be seized under some circumstances. Under the current law, both men would forget the accidents soon without changing their behavior. Two people not fit for driving are still on the road and sharing their experiences with their peers. In criminal statistics, young (male) drivers are over-represented. Taiwan has to require mandatory insurance for third party damages such as loss of income and personal suffering, at least for beginners.
At the moment, the obligatory insurance burdens my medical expenses, which are mostly covered by the National Health Insurance.
Claudius Petzold is a counsel at Washington Group and Associates.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
For years, the use of insecure smart home appliances and other Internet-connected devices has resulted in personal data leaks. Many smart devices require users’ location, contact details or access to cameras and microphones to set up, which expose people’s personal information, but are unnecessary to use the product. As a result, data breaches and security incidents continue to emerge worldwide through smartphone apps, smart speakers, TVs, air fryers and robot vacuums. Last week, another major data breach was added to the list: Mars Hydro, a Chinese company that makes Internet of Things (IoT) devices such as LED grow lights and the
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
RSS