From a lefty I know..."Yeah, it's murder, but that's okay as long as I view the victim as an inconvenience."
(media.kotakuinaction2.win)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (88)
sorted by:
Tell that to the tax man. Tell that to the good samaritan laws.
Tell that to several jurisdictions with the exact opposite policy.
Uh, I think you have the wrong term here. They do the opposite of what you're thinking.
Good Samaritan laws explictly make you not legally liable for when you are voluntarily attempting a reasonable, good-faith, attempt at a rescue.
For example: you see someone lying in the road without a pulse, so you start doing chest compressions on them. But, you do them too hard and you break or crack part of their ribs. A Good Samaritan Law would cover you from the legal liability of the medical cost of repairing their ribs. The person can't sue you to recoup those costs.
Maybe I did use the wrong term. I mean the laws that require you to help. They require you to be a good samaritan. The state requires the use of your body to save someone's life. Now that usually means you are required to call for help (police, ambulance, fire, whatever) but I wouldn't be surprised that it will mean you must do CPR or use an automated defibrilator in the near future.
Oh, okay, those. Those aren't too common, but they do exist. Normally as part of a professional requirement. Like a psychologist mandated to inform the police if they find someone to be violently abusive.
I would love some examples if you have any
Wales, England, Germany, Belgium, several more euro countries. Check out this section on the wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organ_donation#Legislation_and_global_perspectives and look for opt-out or "presumed consent".