The Trolley Problem Meets the Open Road: The Case of William Honey

On the night of August 25, 2019, an ordinary work shift turned into a life-or-death crisis for dump truck driver William "Porkchop" Honey. With split-second reflexes, he made a choice that prevented catastrophe—placing his truck as a barrier to stop a wrong-way driver speeding towards a construction crew. His quick action ensured that his colleagues survived, even as his own truck bore the brunt of the impact.

This moment of heroism presents a stark contrast to the famous trolley problem, a philosophical dilemma where one must decide between passively allowing multiple deaths or actively choosing to sacrifice one life to save others. Honey didn’t have time for moral calculations—he acted on instinct, saving lives without hesitation. In doing so, his story challenges the conventional framing of the trolley problem, which often assumes that decision-making in crisis situations is purely rational. It’s not. The realities of workers like Honey prove that the human element—courage, selflessness, instinct—plays a vital role in split-second survival decisions.

When the Lives Truckers Save Go Unnoticed

In the age of autonomous trucking, companies increasingly view accidents in cold, statistical terms, often ignoring the life-saving actions of human drivers. Instead, they focus on the number of lives lost while disregarding those saved—effectively erasing stories like Honey's.

This poses a troubling question: If companies only measure the fatalities in accidents, not the lives preserved by drivers like Honey, what message does that send? Does it suggest that automated systems, devoid of human intuition, will ultimately be preferred despite their inability to make heroic split-second decisions?

The case of Honey illustrates the problem with this approach. A self-driving truck, programmed only to follow pre-set rules, might never have reacted as he did. It would have calculated probabilities rather than instinctively throwing itself into harm's way for others. But Honey did—because he saw not just an approaching disaster, but people in need of protection.

Toward Justice for Human Drivers

If autonomous trucking companies fail to recognize the lives saved by human drivers, they risk devaluing the human element that makes trucking safe in unpredictable situations. Instead of merely tallying losses, the industry must acknowledge the full impact of human-driven interventions—recognizing that the calculus of safety is not just about casualties but also about lives saved.

A path toward justice means shifting the conversation. It means calling for transparency in how companies assess trucking accidents and demanding that human judgment—flawed yet indispensable—is recognized as an irreplaceable asset. It means ensuring that companies investing in automation do not erase the heroism of drivers like Honey in favor of efficiency metrics.

Real justice begins when stories like this are not forgotten. When those behind the wheel are acknowledged not just for their skills but for their willingness to risk everything for the people around them. Because numbers alone will never tell the full story of what it takes to keep roads safe. William Honey did what no machine could have done that night—he chose to save lives. And that choice deserves to be remembered, honored, and protected.