 85242 |
 35212 |
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||
| Welcome to the Exploding Garrmondo Weiner Interactive Swiss Army Penis. |
|
GFF is a community of gaming and music enthusiasts. We have a team of dedicated moderators, constant member-organized activities, and plenty of custom features, including our unique journal system. If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ or our GFWiki. You will have to register before you can post. Membership is completely free (and gets rid of the pesky advertisement unit underneath this message).
|
 |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
Ghost
 Member 4460 Level 13.04 Apr 2006 |
Really interesting argument. Honestly. But thinking it over, I have to disagree.
I don't see what's wrong about forcing people to avoid seriously courting danger for others. It is money-and-life saving pragmatism. It is illegal to put yourself in a situation where there's a damn good chance you'll kill someone else - tough shit. You can't fly a plane untrained because there's a good chance you'll fuck up and kill someone - even if you inist "you can handle it." You can't build an unsafe bridge and wait for the collapse to get charged. You can't place a loaded gun in your nursery and let negligence charges wait until a child successfully shoots themselves. The hazardous situation doesn't have to manifest itself to be wrong - wrong enough to legistlate against, if it's dangerous enough. Jam it back in, in the dark.
Last edited by How Unfortunate; Jan 14, 2007 at 01:44 AM.
|
How Unfortunate