A thought experiment.
by Menon
There is a zebra crossing. The law gives right of way to the pedestrian when he crosses. Of course when no pedestrian is in sight, the car has right of way.
However the law did not take into consideration the existence of two scientists, simultaneously working on the invention of an invisibility cloak. Their names are Mr. Green and Mr. Zed. No one knows of their inventions as of yet.
One day both Mr Green and Mr Zed have achieved their life's work inventing the invisibility cloaks, in different parts of the same town. Mr Green throws his cloak around his car, and goes for a drive most undoubtedly invisible. Mr Zed throws his own cloak around himself, and goes for a stroll. Equally and unquestionably invisible.
By an unfortunate stroke of fate, the very moment Mr Zed crosses the zebra crossing, Mr Green drives straight through and the invisible car unknowingly knocks down the invisible man. Thankfully Mr Zed is still alive, but the case goes to court.
Mr Green argues he was not wrong as he did not see Mr Zed crossing. In fact Mr Zed most willfully avoided being seen, by wearing his invisibility cloak. But Mr Zed counters by claiming, Mr Green was being an irresponsible road user by choosing to stay invisible, which he clearly did. No pedestrian cannot thus be made to take the blame for an accident involving a car they cannot see.
clearly based on principle they are both right. so how then should the court rule?
and is the long term solution to outlaw the use of invisibility cloaks?