The Blame Game
In the world of today, victimhood trumps justice:
Western jurisprudence has arrived at this sorry juncture partially because of idiotic concepts like "deep pockets" lawsuits. While attending the University of Houston, I took a business law class. The "professor" explained that it was accepted practice that for identical culpability, a wealthier corporation or individual should pay more damages than a poorer one. The flaw in that so-called logic, of course, is that it's about revenge rather than justice. That practice, if standardized, will inevitably lead to injustice and legal favoritism, neither of which are conducive to the continued rule of law, the very basis of civilized societies.
When I pointed this out, Mr Academe raised his hackles and -- in nearly as many words -- told me to shut the hell up. That's the point where I dropped his class, though it was a near thing. I was only a year out of the Marine Corps and I was as likely to punch someone in the mouth as argue with them. I made it to the door without turning his face into hamburger primarily because the door was at the back of the room.
Cases like this one in Canada -- a drunken minor steals a car and the car owner is blamed for not locking the car -- are dangerously similar to stating that a girl who dresses provocatively deserves to be raped. When placing blame and assigning victimhood status take precedence over accountability for individual actions, societal breakdown cannot be far behind.
A garage is partly liable for a "catastrophic brain injury" a 15-year-old suffered when a car he helped steal from the business crashed, Ontario's highest court has ruled.
"On the face of things, the notion that an innocent party could owe a duty of care to someone who steals from him seems extravagant," Ontario Court of Appeal Justice Grant Huscroft wrote in the court's ruling. "But matters are not so simple."
A three-judge Appeal Court panel backed a jury's finding that Rankin's Garage & Sales in the Bruce County village of Paisley is partly liable because it left the key in the car and took no steps to prevent the car from being stolen.
"Rankin's Garage was easily accessible by anyone," Huscroft said. "There was no evidence of any security measures designed to keep people off the property when the business was not open. Cars were left unlocked with the keys in them. The risk of theft was clear."
Western jurisprudence has arrived at this sorry juncture partially because of idiotic concepts like "deep pockets" lawsuits. While attending the University of Houston, I took a business law class. The "professor" explained that it was accepted practice that for identical culpability, a wealthier corporation or individual should pay more damages than a poorer one. The flaw in that so-called logic, of course, is that it's about revenge rather than justice. That practice, if standardized, will inevitably lead to injustice and legal favoritism, neither of which are conducive to the continued rule of law, the very basis of civilized societies.
When I pointed this out, Mr Academe raised his hackles and -- in nearly as many words -- told me to shut the hell up. That's the point where I dropped his class, though it was a near thing. I was only a year out of the Marine Corps and I was as likely to punch someone in the mouth as argue with them. I made it to the door without turning his face into hamburger primarily because the door was at the back of the room.
Cases like this one in Canada -- a drunken minor steals a car and the car owner is blamed for not locking the car -- are dangerously similar to stating that a girl who dresses provocatively deserves to be raped. When placing blame and assigning victimhood status take precedence over accountability for individual actions, societal breakdown cannot be far behind.
posted by Jar(egg)head at 16:06
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home