Is this a crime

[fundayz]

Yes. Negligence. We all have a duty of care and we are expected to intervene or alert authorities.

When my partner was in kindergarten a boy in his class had a seizure and died. The teacher ended up going to court and was given weekend detention for twelve (I think) months because they did not do anything in their power to help. The teacher thought he was mucking around.

So yeah, it's a crime. You have to help.

No it is not. There is a HUGE difference between letting a person under your care die and letting a random stranger die.

The example you give is a crime because the teacher was the appointed adult responsible for the children's well-being. Since you are not the person responsible for a sinking stranger's well being you are not liable.

Shoudl there be a law that forces you to save people in peril? Maybe, some countries DO have these laws, but the fact remains that there is no such law in the US or Canada.

 

[Tanakh]

And what a nice example of a sexist comment.
(Is that enough not to trigger a short post warning?).

Really? I find it a little juvenile and naive to think of it as sexist. The average very old people will probably put themselves at risk when getting a person out of quicksand, the average able-bodied young man won't.

Do you find for example the declaration of protection of woman and children (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/protectionwomen.htm) from the ohchr sexist?

For me it just makes sense to protect the most vulnerable, and in our human society a woman usually is more vulnerable than a man.

 

[SillyBear]

Yes. Negligence. We all have a duty of care and we are expected to intervene or alert authorities.

When my partner was in kindergarten a boy in his class had a seizure and died. The teacher ended up going to court and was given weekend detention for twelve (I think) months because they did not do anything in their power to help. The teacher thought he was mucking around.

So yeah, it's a crime. You have to help.

No it is not. There is a HUGE difference between letting a person under your care die and letting a random stranger die.

The example you give is a crime because the teacher was the appointed adult responsible for the children's well-being. Since you are not the person responsible for a sinking stranger's well being you are not liable.

Eh.. What is it with this forum and the hostile tone? HUGE DIFFERENCE HARAHRAHRAHRH!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence

It's not that hard to do research man.

 

[Linolium25]

I believe there is a law in the US that is a Good Someritan Law, which means you must help a person who's dying or being robbed et. if you can, so, yeah, if the man is drowning in quicksand there, it's illegal not to help him, as well as it is immoral.

 

[teebeeohh]

depends, are you taking pictures?

 

[Tdc2182]

Depends on the country.

In the US, the least you have to do is inform the Emergency responders.

 

[Rawne1980]

Just for those that keep saying yes to it being a legal matter in the USA.

In the common law of the United States and other anglosphere countries, there is no general duty to come to the rescue of another.[1] Generally, a person cannot be held liable for doing nothing while another person is in peril

There is NO law saying you have to help.

Those mentioning the Good Samaritan Law.

In some jurisdictions, unless a caretaker relationship (such as a parent-child or doctor-patient relationship) exists prior to the illness or injury, or the "good Samaritan" is responsible for the existence of the illness or injury, no person is required to give aid of any sort to a victim.

Taken from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law

So no, you have no legal obligation whatsoever in some countries (read United States and United Kingdom) to help anyone in peril.

It's a bit of a pricks move to leave someone you could help but in the US and UK at least, you are not legally bound to help anyone.

 

[Tdc2182]

I believe there is a law in the US that is a Good Someritan Law, which means you must help a person who's dying or being robbed et. if you can, so, yeah, if the man is drowning in quicksand there, it's illegal not to help him, as well as it is immoral.

I'm pretty sure the Good Samaritan law just protects you from prosecution if you accidentally do harm to someone who you are trying to save.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law

Then again, it's different in a few places.

 

[Woodsey]

I think it is here (UK). You're expected to call the emergency services, although not put yourself in harm's way.

 

[mjc0961]

I would say it depends on circumstances. If you had no phone or there was no phone signal so you couldn't get a call out, and there wasn't anything around you could use to try and help, I think it'd be a really shit move if they tried to charge you with anything. Of course, if there was something you could do but didn't, then charge away.

 

[Kanatatsu]

Lawyer here. In most countries, including the US and Canada, it is not a crime. There is not such thing as an enforced "good samaritan" law in most countries.

The notable exceptions are a few countries in Europe, where you would be required to call emergency at least. France is an example there.

Note: there are many countries where there is a protection for good samaritans against being sued for wrongdoing (Canada is an example).

 

[puffy786]

Its not a crime since you aren't required by law to save anyone if its not your job but you are a jackass if you let the person die if your life wasn't endangered if you were to try and save the person.

 

[Grospoliner]

Depends on your country, but yes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue

Edit: Ah didn't see it already linked. Meh.

 

[fundayz]

Eh.. What is it with this forum and the hostile tone? HUGE DIFFERENCE HARAHRAHRAHRH!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence

It's not that hard to do research man.

Way to do "research" and still not know what you are talking about...

Criminal negligence only applies when you have an appointed responsibility.

For exmpale, if a supervisor's negligence results in a worker's death then he'd be responisble, if a teacher's negligence results in a student's death then they would be responsible, if a nurse's negligence results in a patient's death then they would be responsible.

You have absolutely no responsibility for a stranger's well being and as such you are not required by law to aid them.

In North American there is absolutely no law that requires you to save a stranger's life. There is a universal moral duty to do so, but no a law.

 

[Xanadu84]

First off, a clarification: This is NOT a matter of a Good Samaritan Law, like the episode of Seinfeld. This is a matter of Duty to Rescue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue

The shortest answer that can be given is, "Depends on where you live". There are plenty of varied laws covering aspects of this all over the world. In some places the answer is no, some places yes. In a whole lot of places the answer is, "Maybe" and really, its going to depend on your lawyer, the prosecution, the judge, and the most minute of details to figure out how the law actually gets enforced.

The common theme seems to be that you will only get in trouble if you could have saved their lives without any particular bother to you, and choose not to. So for the sake of your argument, check out the article and find your country or state. And for the sake of reality, you only have something to worry about if you are a TREMENDOUS dick.

 

[debossman21]

not a crime, but it could hurt you if its against your morals or something

 

[Aulleas123]

"if you happen across a stranger who is sinking in quicksand and you just leave him to die is that a crime"

No, depending on the country you live in, there are different defenses against charges. I would assume that many countries would say that you could make many claims to reason why you didn't act and there are no witnesses to say that there was a way for you to save that individual. It's the same thing as refusing to stop a mugging, sure it might be the right thing to do but it could also get you killed.

In addition, if the setting doesn't allow for you to do anything then you really shouldn't try. One factor is the presence of any long poles or boards, if these aren't around then you really shouldn't be trying to save them (short of screaming advice and fleeing to get help). Any victim of drowning shouldn't be saved through jumping in to the quicksand (you could get pulled in too). There are many reasons why someone who isn't trained should not go and try to save them.

 

[razer17]

No, but it would be a questionable thing to do.

A governing body should NEVER make laws prohibiting inaction, because responsibility of action lies upon the actor. A person who does not commit an action cannot be held guilty of inaction.

Surely you just described negligence, which is not doing something, or inaction, that then leads to ill consequences. Which definitely should be illegal.

Anyway, as far as I can tell, you do have to phone emergency services. It's not exactly specifically written, but the law says something like performing an action that a reasonable person would. Which means at the minimum getting help. Which in this day and age with millions of mobile phones really shouldn't be hard.

As for actually helping the guy, that's up to you. It wouldn't be illegal not to rescue him, and you probably shouldn't. No point both of you dying. Leave it to the pro's.

Recently, here in Britain, a policeman was fired from his job for risking his life saving someone who was drowning. He saved the girl, and he was unhurt, but he was fired for endangering himself. He was sacked for being a hero, basically. So as far as Britain goes, I can say for certain that you wouldn't have to save him.

 

[SillyBear]

Criminal negligence only applies when you have an appointed responsibility.

And appointed responsibility exists in all of us. It's called a duty of care.

People also have the capacity go to prison for not assisting others or alerting authorities after a car accident. It's happened before.

Drivers also quite often go to prison for being criminally negligent. Your duty of care does not magically change once you hop in a car. At least in the majority of the world it doesn't.

In North American there is absolutely no law that requires you to save a stranger's life. There is a universal moral duty to do so, but no a law.

I'm not from North America. I'm not talking about North America. What North America does is not an indication of anything other than North America. The person who asked the question is not from North America. So what's your point? I'm wrong because even though 90% of the first world and the thread starter exists in a state where this would be a crime, you're from the USA so you know best?

Also, not all of North America is how you say. Quite a few states in the USA do have legislation that supports a universal duty of care. I know Florida is one, and the test is based on foresee ability. Tennessee's is this:

Tennessee criminal negligence judged on:
the foreseeability of the harm or injury;
the possible magnitude of the potential harm or injury;
the importance or social value of the activity engaged in by the defendant;
the usefulness of the conduct to the defendant;
the feasibility of alternative conduct;
the costs and burdens associated with the alternative conduct;
the relative usefulness of the alternative conduct;
and the relative safety of the alternative conduct.

With enough evidence and a good legal team, there is no reason why someone couldn't go to prison over this. Even in the USA. Also, in: California, Florida, Hawaii, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Ohio, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin there is legislation that states you must attempt to alert rescue services in civil crisis.

It might be a rare occurrence in the USA, but there is legislation that could in theory convict someone over this.

But it's completely irrelevant anyway. I never even claimed to be talking about the USA and nothing I have said so far has been false. You've come in with your US blinders on and started insisting I'm wrong. The OP is from Malta, which is in the EU. So yes, the scenario he described is a crime.

 

[Krinku]

Technically not a crime, doesn't mean its good for your conscience...