A motorist was driving to a luncheon in a car that he knew did not have operating headlights. On the way there he was rear-ended by another driver who had been driving 20 m. p.h. over the speed limit posted on that stretch of road. He suffered personal injuries and his car was extensively damaged. The jurisdiction makes it a misdemeanor to drive a vehicle that does not have operating headlights. If the motorist brings an action against the other driver and the above facts are established, will he prevail?A. Yes, because the other driver violated the speeding statute, but the motorist's damages will be reduced because of his violation of the headlight statute. B. Yes, because the other driver violated the speeding statute, and the motorist's damages will not be reduced despite his violation of the headlight statute. C. No, because the motorist's violation of the headlight statute constitutes negligence per se. D. No, because the motorist has not established that driving 20 m. p.h. over the speed limit created an unreasonable risk of injury to others.