116
Self-punishment Punisher (thelemmy.club)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/slop@hexbear.net
65 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 4 points 4 months ago (3 children)

This is called assault and battery, so it doesn't need its own law.

Why would this not apply at hurling your ass through a windshield into another person then if seatbelts weren't mandatory? I mean I specifically said fucking up skydiving not doing it on purpose

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (2 children)

    I think I just missed your implication that it would be accidental (totally fair assumption, my bad).

    As other people said, reckless endangerment, criminal negligence, and manslaughter are real charges, but ideally we should be trying to prevent these things from happening beyond simply punishing people who do them. As far as I know, this is accounted for in skydiving with the need to have pre-determined drop zones that are appropriately clear for the safety of yourself and the people you might otherwise collide with. The safety requirements are probably not extensive enough, but I am pretty sure it's not legal to just unilaterally decide you're dropping in a public park without preparing the area first (outside of emergencies).

    It's like how driving drunk is illegal, not just an aggravating factor in convictions stemming from getting in a crash, because we want to avoid the conditions of a bad thing happening (and be able to intervene if someone is creating those conditions), not just hope that threat of punishment discourages it.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago (1 child)

    As other people said, reckless endangerment, criminal negligence, and manslaughter are real charges, but ideally we should be trying to prevent these things from happening beyond simply punishing people who do them.

    Just for the understanding, this is still going off of the notion that seatbelt laws are primarily or at least in a major part on account of so other people don't get hit by people getting thrown out of cars, right?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago

    No, seatbelt laws are to save the people in the car mainly, but it's worth noting that it's not just a matter of not wearing a seatbelt being less safe for yourself, it's less safe for others because you being much more likely to die or be seriously injured means you are much more likely to not be able to help other people who have a chance of surviving in an accident.

    That said, I also think it's perfectly fine for the state to demand that you don't just recklessly endanger your own life like that because it's a trivial psychopathological "benefit" for contrarian libertarian types at the expense of literally everyone and everything else to have more people dying and seriously injured at any given time.

    But I was also caught between that and your examples of assault and I can see why you'd find it unclear.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent