不是我主观情绪。一帮磕了药，严重超速，失控撞了树被烧死。结果一帮傻逼来怪门把手设计。报道里哪里写了这几个人想开门但是开不开了？自己瞎几把胡编乱造。
pnlmpnlm 写了： 2025年 11月 7日 13:54你太多主观感情在里面了。
问问ChatGPT文章如何写的怎么分析的，其实人家说的也很有道理， driver可以知道，可能当时忘记了你可以责怪他智商不够；但是乘客不一定知道。
- ）Rear mechanical releases existed but were hidden under carpet, extremely unintuitive, and the passengers likely had no idea they existed.
2） The front mechanical releases should have worked, but the lawsuit says it's “unclear why they didn’t operate,” meaning:
They may have been damaged in the crash,
Or the front passengers may have been incapacitated.
This trapping appears to be the central failure point.
3）A fire started after the crash, and the occupants could not exit before the fire spread
A nearby resident heard screaming for up to 5 minutes after the collision.
During this period she reports: “the car is on fire now.”
This strongly implies occupants were alive for some time, but unable to exit.
The lawsuit also claims the 2016 Model S lacked later-generation fire-suppressive materials that could have slowed the fire.Thus, fire + inability to exit = fatal combination
In a normal car with standard mechanical door handles, they likely would have been able to exit before the fire reached them.
1. 是的，2016 Model S 的确有前排机械应急开门机构——但这次事故“原因不明没有起作用”。
但事故中并没有发挥作用（原因还不清楚）
