Subject:
|
Re: Tony Martin case: You can't {make up} better criticism of Liberals!
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 28 Jul 2003 16:10:32 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3092 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli wrote:
>
> > > 8. The intruder is a woman who doesn't know that she's four weeks
> > > pregnant; you shoot her in the gut to incapacitate her and thereby kill her
> > > embryo; are you responsible for the death of her innocent child?
> >
> > As the child is under her care and if through her ill-advised actions she
> > gets shot in self defence, I would say that the fault lies with her.
>
> Okay, but let's extend it a little further.
>
> Suppose we went with variation #3 from my previous post:
>
> 3. The "intruder" is your daughter who has sneaked down to the kitchen for a
> glass of water during the night
Ok I must restate that I do not shoot at noises. In fact more than likely I
wouldn't shoot at all I'd simply knock the intruder out. But anyway...
>
> If you killed your daughter in error, to what extent are you liable?
> Depending on the circumstances, I would guess at least that you're guilty of
> involuntary manslaughter.
Yeah that would be your own dumb fault. I would agree with the involuntary
manslaughter charge.
>
> Now, suppose that you stumble upon an intruder and shoot him, and the bullet
> either misses him or passes through him, killing your daughter, whom neither you
> nor the intruder knew to be standing there. Who is liable?
I think this is the first real 'pickle' you have come up with. Although I find
it extremely unlikely that I would not see my hypothetical daughter behind an
intruder, that still poses an interesting dilemma.
>
> I think that, in this example, you'd have a tough time arguing that the
> intruder is liable for your daughter's death. Admittedly you only fired the
> weapon as a result of the intruder's presence, but you fired by your own will.
I would tend to lean toward the "only fired as a result of the intruder." I am
inclined to think killing one's daughter through actions designed to protect her
would be punishment enough of and in itself.
> How, then, would this differ from my earlier example about an unknowingly
> pregnant intruder?
As far as the pregnant intruder it was her responsiblity to care for her child
if she enters a situation that could result in her and her childs death that is
her fault.
>
> Now that we've moved into the purely hypothetical, I find this debate
> increasingly interesting!
Indeed. If nothing else, it gives me something to think about. Of course I have
to go to work now so we'll have to contuine later.
-Mike Petrucelli
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
73 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
