> I'm wary of stuff that puts the onus of responsibility on people that > aren't > directly responsible. > > The person who shot the other person is to blame, not some chain of > events > that led up to whatever occurred. > > If it's the chain of events, see, there's potentially never an end to > it.
There are a couple of legal issues here that think you're missing. I can illustrate best by starting with absurd exaggerations, then scaling back. Let's say you walk to a public playground and your pistol falls out of your very loose holster. Then a four-year-old child picks up the gun and accidentally kills someone. You, not that child, and not the holster manufacturer, are culpable because you did not reasonably secure your weapon. Now ask yourself, At what point does the owner's loss of his gun cease to make him culpable? If the holster wasn't loose but instead proved to be reasonably secure in its fit with the weapon? Is it a reasonable expectation that he should have checked for the presence of his weapon before leaving the playground? At what point can some reasonably divorce his own private security profile and regimen from some semblance of responsibility to the general public? There is a good reason why these things can become legally muddied, and that you cannot simply state that it is entirely the fault of the direct actor: it's complicated! There are many elements, many questions. Respectfully, Adam Phillip Churvis President Productivity Enhancement ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;160198600;22374440;w Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:257368 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
