Yeah, you're probably right. It's just that this whole incident is just really, really messed up. I can't understand why you wouldn't help out a stabbed person where there was probably zero danger in doing so. At least call 911, which took an awful long time to do. Although I guess you aren't legally bound and forced to help someone in need, aren't you morally? I guess this is argueable as well, seeing as morals are different in everybody, but really, this was just sad. But in retrospect, I can still see why you said that whole line of why laws shouldn't be made when "emotion is running rampant."blisteringsilence wrote:
Really.Smithereener wrote:
Yeah, but in BN's case, there was immediate and apparent danger, and they took the risk and attempted to help them out. In this case, no danger, and they did absolutely nothing except take a damn photo. I agree there should be a law for faliure to provide aid, if there isn't one already.
How would you write this law? How would you enforce it? Where do you draw the lines? How can you legally force a stranger to help another perfect stranger? What if the caregiver, who was only following the law, contracts a bloodborne virus, like HIV? What if the victim attacks them?
You can't force people to help others.
Word.Smithereener wrote:
Yeah, you're probably right. It's just that this whole incident is just really, really messed up. I can't understand why you wouldn't help out a stabbed person where there was probably zero danger in doing so. At least call 911, which took an awful long time to do. Although I guess you aren't legally bound and forced to help someone in need, aren't you morally? I guess this is argueable as well, seeing as morals are different in everybody, but really, this was just sad. But in retrospect, I can still see why you said that whole line of why laws shouldn't be made when "emotion is running rampant."blisteringsilence wrote:
Really.Smithereener wrote:
Yeah, but in BN's case, there was immediate and apparent danger, and they took the risk and attempted to help them out. In this case, no danger, and they did absolutely nothing except take a damn photo. I agree there should be a law for faliure to provide aid, if there isn't one already.
How would you write this law? How would you enforce it? Where do you draw the lines? How can you legally force a stranger to help another perfect stranger? What if the caregiver, who was only following the law, contracts a bloodborne virus, like HIV? What if the victim attacks them?
You can't force people to help others.
Morally, I would agree that you should be bound to help someone in danger. That being said, I'm a paramedic. I'm held to a different standard, in that I am legally bound to report certain crimes/situations, both on and off duty.
That being said, we are judging people without knowing their circumstances. An illegal alien, for example, would not call the police, no matter how bad he wanted to. Someone with a warrant likewise. Others may just have had bad experiences with the police in the past. Hell, I'd bet at least one was in a hurry, and didn't want to be undually detained.
Keep in mind I am NOT apologizing for what these people did. I know that I would do differently. But, to castigate them, and call them names, is to ignore the circumstances surrounding the event.
My last hypothetical: What if the woman who was stabbed was white, and the only customers in the store were young black men?
Those kind of situations are the reason why it'd be nice if the story went a little more in depth, revealing the entire situation. Then again, the whole incident was caught on security tapes, and last time I've seen those kind of videos on the telly, I've seen nothing but black/white/gray fuzzy videos, so I must have been hard to determine the ethnicity/identity of the people in question. To be honest, while the first hypothetical situations you stated have some kind of justification, the situation of "too much in a hurry" really has no justification IMO unless that person was in a hurry because of some kind of family issue (i.e. just hearing of a death in the family, family member got sick/hurt, etc.)blisteringsilence wrote:
Word.Smithereener wrote:
Yeah, you're probably right. It's just that this whole incident is just really, really messed up. I can't understand why you wouldn't help out a stabbed person where there was probably zero danger in doing so. At least call 911, which took an awful long time to do. Although I guess you aren't legally bound and forced to help someone in need, aren't you morally? I guess this is argueable as well, seeing as morals are different in everybody, but really, this was just sad. But in retrospect, I can still see why you said that whole line of why laws shouldn't be made when "emotion is running rampant."blisteringsilence wrote:
Really.
How would you write this law? How would you enforce it? Where do you draw the lines? How can you legally force a stranger to help another perfect stranger? What if the caregiver, who was only following the law, contracts a bloodborne virus, like HIV? What if the victim attacks them?
You can't force people to help others.
Morally, I would agree that you should be bound to help someone in danger. That being said, I'm a paramedic. I'm held to a different standard, in that I am legally bound to report certain crimes/situations, both on and off duty.
That being said, we are judging people without knowing their circumstances. An illegal alien, for example, would not call the police, no matter how bad he wanted to. Someone with a warrant likewise. Others may just have had bad experiences with the police in the past. Hell, I'd bet at least one was in a hurry, and didn't want to be undually detained.
Keep in mind I am NOT apologizing for what these people did. I know that I would do differently. But, to castigate them, and call them names, is to ignore the circumstances surrounding the event.
My last hypothetical: What if the woman who was stabbed was white, and the only customers in the store were young black men?
That last hypothetical I have mixed opinions on. I'm of Korean descent. My grandparents seriously hate Japanese people due to their memories from Japanese oppression pre WWII. I, on the other hand, have absolutely no problem with the Japanese, and have friendsm that are Japanese themselves. This can draw a kind of parallel to your situation in that seeing as they are black, they might be somewhat hesistant to dial 911; afterall, there are so many instances we can point out when blacks have been oppressed by the whites. But at the same time, they're young and the times of oppression are long gone. Much like I don't hate Japanese people, just because their previous generations may have done some wrong, these young blacks may have no ill will towards whites since most of these oppressive acts were from long ago and therefore may be inclined to dial in faster (morally).
I'm sure that gender might play a part, but can't think of anything coherant.
I don't know precisely what the legal situation is in germany, but there is some kind of law that requires "bystanders" to help those in need, even if they are total strangers. The minimum requirement is to call authorities, i.e. the police, fire brigade, paramedic, whatever the situation requires.
No one is of course obliged to help if that would mean putting themselves in danger.
What I don't understand in blisteringsilence's argument is why the law in the US requires people to help others in a car accident, but under no other circumstances ? Or did I get that wrong ? How do you adress that ?
And while I agree that you cannot hold people responsible for something they didn't cause ( in this example, the guilty party was the person who stabbed the woman, not those who chose not to help her ), I also think that sometimes people need to be "reminded" of what good citizens need to do. Especially in big cities, where violent crime and all sorts of accidents are common, people get apathic, and stop caring for others.
They just can't be bothered any more.
And that is a development that I think should be fought in some way. If the law is the best way, is another question though.
No one is of course obliged to help if that would mean putting themselves in danger.
What I don't understand in blisteringsilence's argument is why the law in the US requires people to help others in a car accident, but under no other circumstances ? Or did I get that wrong ? How do you adress that ?
And while I agree that you cannot hold people responsible for something they didn't cause ( in this example, the guilty party was the person who stabbed the woman, not those who chose not to help her ), I also think that sometimes people need to be "reminded" of what good citizens need to do. Especially in big cities, where violent crime and all sorts of accidents are common, people get apathic, and stop caring for others.
They just can't be bothered any more.
And that is a development that I think should be fought in some way. If the law is the best way, is another question though.
Acutally, my example was a hypothetical, but you did hit some truth.B.Schuss wrote:
What I don't understand in blisteringsilence's argument is why the law in the US requires people to help others in a car accident, but under no other circumstances ? Or did I get that wrong ? How do you adress that ?
In the US, you are not legally obligated to report any crime that happens to yourself other than a car accident that happens on a public road. One of those strange nuances of law.
this:
was a hypothetical, showing one of the many potential difficulties with a law requiring bystanders to render assistance.me wrote:
Doesn't matter. No one is legally obligated to call and report a crime that happened to SOMEONE ELSE. Again, if you were, where would the line be drawn? Not to mention the chaos that would ensue if 200 people were to witness a car accident. 200 near-simultaneous phone calls to a dispatch office with 6 operators? What if a real emergency couldn't get through?
and you should have shut upMong0ose wrote:
Nubs should have gone prone and pulled out a PKMBN wrote:
We had a situation recently where 2 Australian men and a Dutch backpacker saw a woman being dragged into a car at 8am in the morning. They intervened and all 3 were shot and 1 died.S.Lythberg wrote:
full story here.
I work in retail, and it's true, the level of apathy in people is simply astounding. Is this an American phenomenon, or do you Europeans and Australians have the same problem?
They chose to not show apathy and one man paid the ultimate price. Brave people.
I still have hope in the ordinary man to do extraordinary things.
Its the same her ppl dont want to get involved a few days ago a woman got brutaly attacked and almost died after her attackers left her with a scarf wrapped tigh around her neck. And this was the second time she got attacked and its all linked to that she had been a witness in a murder trial....
I hope that they do like they have done in iceland that if you see someone hurt/in need of help it will be punishable to ignore the hurt person
I hope that they do like they have done in iceland that if you see someone hurt/in need of help it will be punishable to ignore the hurt person