You could always have pulled over.
I rail against touch and ambiguous controls in safety critical applications more than most, but continuing to drive when you can't see properly is akin to get-there-itis.
With low visibility slowing down in the middle of the road is not save either though, given that those behind you don't expect it, and that few people keep sufficient distance. Same with standing on the side in such conditions.
In the described situation I think the best option is to be able and use the right buttons quickly, sticking to the original subject of the discussion. The option that would let you safely keep going with the flow is the best one I would say, under the given conditions.
Even if a million scenarios and alternatives can be thought of, what's the point of derailing a discussion focused on a particular subject? We only have a few hundred comments of room here, I think there is more value in keeping the focus.
And while the ideal scenario is of course that no problem arises, and second being that the problem is swiftly and efficiently resolved.. given those scenarios do not occur, and you have to decide between "keep going without seeing the road" and "putting hazards on and slowly coming to a complete stop", the latter definitely seems more reasonable in every way.
Of course specific scenarios where stopping will be less safe can be thought up, but statistically speaking, I dont see how an uncontrolled multi-ton moving object would be more safe that a stationary one.
Yes, obviously, but poorly designed or failed equipment does not absolve you of your responsibility to drive safely.
> Even if a million scenarios and alternatives can be thought of, what's the point of derailing a discussion focused on a particular subject?
The topic is road safety and the point is both pertinent and revealing. The attitude in your comment and others are highlighting basic failures in driver training, independent of the equipment design.
Honestly, I think you should reflect on your attitude here before you end up a road traffic statistic.
I agree with you on this -- but that is not how people behave. Just because people should behave that way, doesnt mean they do. People have a natural inclination to try and fix the problem by giving up a bit of attention -- that is bad for all of us who are affected by these decisions -- and this means -- fix the design.
You are already operating the vehicle in traffic in bad conditions for yourself and everyone else, and still need to be able to operate the vehicle and still need to be able to see no matter which of the possible reactions you believe is least-risk at that particular time.
Whether you judge that the least-risk response is to turn on hazards and slow down or even stop right in the road where other drivers who you can not see are not expecting it, whether you can find a place to pull over and see it clearly enough to be absolutely sure there is not a child standing there, or to make no changes to current behavior at all so that you are the most predictable to everyone else, you still need to be able to operate the vehicle and see the road and other vehicles in order to do any of those. None of your suggestions gets around that, even coming to a full stop with hazards on.
Your theory also depends on other drivers to see you and your hazards. Where is the hazard control? This whole discussion is about poor controls.
Even if they did exactly what you who were not there presumes to declare they should have done, it doesn't change anything. It doesn't change the problem or solve the problem or work around the problem.
I mean this in the most charitable way possible - you should refrain from driving until you rectify this issue, either through self reflection or remedial training. Until then, you are a danger to yourself and others.
Why are people so exceptional lazy that they would put other people at risk while they wait for a machine to do something for them, rather than reaching up and wiping away some of the condensation so they can safely operate the vehicle? Are people really this astonishingly incompetent?
Another situation - narrow intercity winding roads, 0 room for safe stopping of car for next 2km. Again, asking for a crash especially in situation when your windshield fogs which is usually during heavier rain.
Yet another situation - driving in even semi-dense traffic in any bigger city. Again, no place to just stop and block others safely.
I could go on for a while. Not always the smartest move.
I do believe though that if we took literally all possible scenarios and weighed them by the probability of them occuring, the results would show that a stopped vehicle is safer than a moving vehicle whose driver can not see.
In fact, I feel confident in saying that based on this comment, you are an unsafe driver and should voluntarily undertake remedial training, as you are unfit to be on the road.
It did happen to me in dense traffic, there are few ways to mitigate it but stopping in multilane road for anything but a serious medical condition or car dying would be about weighting which risk is greater, this is not about annoying somebody but safety. If I had 0 visibility through windshield and nothing else helped, in lower speed I would pop my head out a bit for example (which would clear the windshield too).
But maybe you don't drive around many french drivers :) They run very aggressively with minimal gaps, and our roads (and parking spaces) are much narrower than US ones for example. You have to drive at the limit, whole crowd always does.