Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uscvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!uscvax!kurtzman From: kurtzman@uscvax.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) Newsgroups: net.abortion Subject: Re: Stephen Kurtzman on legal responsibility Message-ID: <2@uscvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 4-Nov-85 16:33:13 EST Article-I.D.: uscvax.2 Posted: Mon Nov 4 16:33:13 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 8-Nov-85 04:56:54 EST References: <464@spice.cs.cmu.edu.ARPA> <62@uscvax.UUCP> <680@ccice2.UUCP> Reply-To: kurtzman@usc-cse.UUCP (Stephen Kurtzman) Organization: CS&CE Depts, U.S.C., Los Angeles, CA Lines: 30 Keywords: In article <680@ccice2.UUCP> pwk@ccice2.UUCP (Paul W. Karber) writes: >>The law is filled with ideas >>that address subtle differences in circumstances. It uses concepts such as >>"intent", "reasonable doubt", "ordinary care", etc. ... >>What if two people did everything within their >>power not to conceive and their method(s) of contraception failed. From a >>legal perspective they had no intent, and used extraordinary care to prevent >>conception. Are they really responsible for circumstances beyond their >>control? Legally the answer would probably be no. > >So what if I uses every precaution to prevent a shooting accident >but the gun goes off anyway? There is no intent and extraordinary >care was used. Am I not still responsible for whoever or whatever my >gun hits? The same can be said for driving a car. When two cars >collide, by definition someone is at fault. If no driving infraction >occurred then the collision would not have happened. You may take >the greatest care and have the best of intentions, but a gust of >wind or a patch of ice (circumstances beyond your control) may >cause your vehicle to leave the road and hit a bystander. You are >still responsible for their medical expenses (and maybe more). >There are gray areas where contributory negligence is involved, >but I don't see how a fetus can be guilty of contributory negligence. > >NOTE: Abortion seems irresponsible only if you believe the fetus is >a living human being. > Legally if you were taking all the precautions required by law in handling either your gun or your automobile, you would not be guilty of a crime. There might be some cause for a civil suit but not a criminal suit.