06-08-2016, 01:01 PM
(06-08-2016, 12:53 PM)bfine32 Wrote: They chose to go to work to support their family or perhaps take a loved one to the hospital. There are a vast number of reason folks must commute during dangerous times. I'd imagine a good many accidents happen during rush hour. Comparing that to choosing to go to a party and getting smashed is silly.
See my point about the philosophical debate here. Either increasing likelihood of causing bad things to happen results in personal blame or it doesn't but it has to be consistent. Life is about choices in everything we do, if a good intention such as taking a loved one results in you getting hit then you are still responsible for it. You made a choice and while it may be easier to deal with the consequences because of the choice you still caused it to happen.
Let me come full circle, I am not obtuse. I understand what everyone is saying. The issue is that if you aren't willing to apply the logic across the board then you have to determine what the metric is for judging personal responsibility is knowing that everything is in affect the result of something we do. The issue here is there is a bias towards applying more personal responsibility to victims of sexual assaults that include alcohol than to other crimes. It has been proven in mock jury studies that juries are less likely to convict presented the exact same evidence but in one trial they are told the victim is drunk and in another they aren't.
