Radeonx said:
firedfns13 said:
Radeonx said:
To kill by accident.
Because you weren't intentionally meaning harm. It isn't all necessarily your fault, where you tried to hurt someone but failed to kill them.
Drunk Driving.
Still acceptable? NOO. 100% preventable.
Drunk driving doesn't always result in death.
And, did I say it was acceptable? All I said that it was better than trying to kill someone.
I wonder what you'd think of this. I don't look at all accidents as equal. Take these two.
1- You've just thrown a bunch of trash into a large compactor, and flipped the switch to activate it, not realizing that some homeless guy has wormed his way halfway into the compactor through a small(ish) gap, and is looking for non-crushed items. (I almost did this to someone, but heard the idiot before flipping the switch)
2- You're a surgeon, responsible for a patient from when you cut them to when you sew them back up. You leave debris in a patient, providing a focal point for infection, and the patient goes septic and dies a short time after the surgery. (Had to throw this in for those who think medical types shouldn't be sued/jailed for carelessness)
My take is that, in #1, part of the standard operating procedure for the compactor was not to stop and listen for dumpster divers before flipping the switch. If someone was killed by it, that person would have had to deliberately place his/herself in danger, and short of walking around the building and looking for homeless people in the compactor (which as far as I know only happened this once), there was no way to be sure that someone wasn't there every single time the thing was operated. It was operated frequently. I would not hold the accidental killer responsible in #1.
In #2, while something like this is easy to do, it is the surgeons job to make sure nothing is left in the patient that shouldn't be there. They get paid to do a job that, if done wrong, can kill you. You can also die from many complications which the surgeon has no control over, but I believe that if it is something that could have been prevented by due dilligence, then that person is every bit as responsible as a deliberate killer.
In short, if there is nothing that the accidental killer could have reasonably done to prevent the death of someone, I don't hold them responsible at all. If it's due to some kind of negligence (like the drunk driver/careless surgeon), then they might as well have planned it.
ohhh, interesting.
