It depends on the circumstances.
Hopefully you would do the right thing and do your best to save them.
You would be a hero if you see someone drowning in the water and are able to succeed in saving them. The first step to save someone from drowning is to get them out of the water or at least getting their head out of the water.
If the accident was not your fault (someone rear-ended you, for example), then you would claim on their insurance, and they would pay out.
well u can help by putting a floter in there or if you know how to swim save them of course
It would be the person driving fault because it is like the same thing as driving and hitting someone.
Johnny kills a soc because they were drowning Ponyboy.
If you mean that someone was starting to merge into traffic and then they stopped and you rear-ended them, you would be at fault. If the person merging into traffic hit someone, the merger would be at fault because they failed to yield to oncoming traffic. These are typical scenarios. Other scenarios or circumstances may effect the outcome.
The problem with no fault insurance is that fault is usually assigned thus making no fault insurance an incorrect statement. Your collision coverage is where you would make the claim in this situation.
Say you brought it on yourself, the boat is theirs, and leaves and watches you drown and takes your belongings.
Well, if you saw someone drowning and you dived in and rescued them, you would have saved someones life. or if you saw someone choking or having a heart attack and no one is around, call 911. That would be considered saving someone's life too.
I imagine it would be someone that was to be found "not at fault" in an accident.
Yes, it probably would. If you changed lanes and you bump in to someone in front of you, you were not looking. The same for if you bumped into someone behind you.