• nudny ekscentryk@szmer.info
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    No it doesn’t. If I cut the brakes in your car and it causes you to run into someone, then it’s my fault, not yours.

    Edit: you know who else could be found viable? The service person who checked the vehicle before you took it on the road and allowed it through despite nonfunctional breaks.

    • heckypecky@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      A gun’s purpose is to kill people, a car’s is not. The analogy is flawed.

      Still, assuming you have mandatory regular inspections of cars in the US, imagine you are an experienced mechanic by profession. Someone lends you a car and says it’s safe but you know immediately this rustbucket hasn’t been to an inspection in decades. By experience and papers. But you drive in a public space anyways and kill someone due to a fault that would have been found during an inspection. It is 100% your fault.

      As I understand it, following safety procedures would have prevented this death, in the same way nonfunctional brakes would certainly be found during service.

      On a side note, as an electrician who has to sign documents that electrical devices are safe to use, if one of those devices kills someone and I can prove that I followed protocol during testing, I am in the clear. Following rules makes the difference between a tragic accident and negligence.

      • Menteros@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        A gun’s purpose is to kill people

        Spoken like a true psychopath.

        A gun’s purpose is to provide safety and utility to the bearer. “Killing people” that are attempting to harm you is called self-defense and is totally legal.