4 ms·

You understand why shooting someone is controversial, but you don't understand why recklessly causing someone to go blind is controversial?

• weberc2 8y ago
  This is a silly comment. You're more likely to blind someone with the dust your car kicks up as you drive by them, and such a person would be actually innocent as opposed to our hypothetical vision-impaired thief.
  • txcwpalpha 8y ago
    Likelihood of injury is irrelevant. If your actions recklessly caused the injury of another person, you are liable for them, even if there was only a 1 in a trillion chance of it happening. And yes, by the way, if you drive by someone knowing that by doing so you will launch debris towards another person in a manner that could injure them, and your car kicks up a rock and hits that person in the head, you would also be liable. Innocence is also irrelevant, as you do not have the right to injure another person, even if they stole from you.
    • cwkoss 8y ago
      I think you're only liable if a "reasonable person" would have expected that result.