Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : To be a Liberal,you have to believe that..... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (5784)	3/14/2000 6:28:00 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 6418

By the way, one does have a legal obligation to help, including at some personal inconvenience and risk, in various emergency situations, including those involving strangers. Actually, under common law, no. A very few jurisdictions are contemplating or perhaps have passed such "good samaritan" laws, but they always exclude situations in which you may put yourself at risk. Under the common law, and in most jurisdictions, if someone is drowning a few feet from shore and you have a life jacket lying on the shore right beside you and you are healthy and there is no risk at all to you to throw the life jacket to the person, you are legally entitled to just watch them drown and do nothing. Indeed, if you do choose to throw the life jacket, and you bonk them on the head and knock them unconscious and they drown just before rescue boat arrives, you could be held liable for wrongful assistance. Once you start to assist someone, you are liable for errors you make, whereas if you don't assist at all, you have no risk of liability. Weird, but that's the common law, and still the law of most jurisdictions.