5 ms·

> People who are super social (or stupid + spreading the plague) What if somebody has asymptomatic covid infection? He or she spreads it without intent, you ca

> People who are super social (or stupid + spreading the plague) What if somebody has asymptomatic covid infection? He or she spreads it without intent, you can not blame them.

dragonwriter 6y ago
> What if somebody has asymptomatic covid infection? He or she spreads it without intent, you can not blame them. Yes, given what is widely publicly known about the disease, I can very easily blame people who are involved engaging in high-spread-risk behavior despite being a-(or, more likely if they are actually spreading it, pre-)symptomatic and who are thereby spreading the virus they don’t know they have.
- h3cate 6y ago
  Harsh. Would you be comfortable convicting those people with attempted murder?
  - input_sh 6y ago
    Not who you're replying to, but not for ignorance. On the other hand, if someone knows they've been exposed and still behave carelessly, I'm absolutely fine with charging people with attempted murder, endangering the public health, or something similar.
    - h3cate 6y ago
      I completely agree if you test positive and don't follow the isolation period then that's a problem. However op seems to be saying that if you go shopping (could be classed as high risk?), don't know you have the virus, and pass it on then that's a problem too? What's the difference between passing this on unintentionally and passing any other virus or disease unintentionally?
  - dragonwriter 6y ago
    > Would you be comfortable convicting those people with attempted murder? No, attempted murder requires specific intent. For the most egregious conduct when they know they are at particularly high risk of being a spreader, even without intent, if someone actually dies, it might arguably be close to depraved-indifference rather than intent-to-kill murder, but more generally negligent homicide if they actually kill people and reckless endangerment, otherwise, would be closer selections from the generically-common American set of crimes. But I’m not arguing they should be criminally liable; saying that an act is not beyond moral blame is not the same that it technically fits — or, even if it does, should necessarily be prosecuted as — a crime.
ruffrey 6y ago
If they know it’s spreadable without symptoms, unfortunate, as is is, there’s a level of fault. Stupid is not a term I would use, though. Mingling with other people at a similar comfort level of contract Covid - that’s just adults being adults. That’s freedom. But if those people then go to unavoidable places like grocery stores, they’re putting people at risk who don’t have much of a choice.
- h3cate 6y ago
  Is there not home delivery where you live?
  - greenyoda 6y ago
    Many people can't afford the extra cost of home delivery. And there isn't nearly enough home delivery capacity to support every shopper.
viztor 6y ago
I doubt any one would spread with intent, which is probably criminal.
- mrkramer 6y ago
  I was alluding to legal situation and term of Negligent homicide/Involuntary manslaughter; it is defined as "the killing of another person without the intent to kill, but where the person's death occurs as a result of the negligent or reckless actions of the defendant." In the situation of Covid it would be something like infecting another person without the intent to infect, but where the person's health might be endangered as a result of the negligent or reckless actions of the defendant (the one who spread the virus).
  - throwaway201103 6y ago
    How does this differ from any other communicable disease with a non-zero mortality that someone might spread either unknowingly or negligently? E.g. influenza just to name one.
- bbarnett 6y ago
  When monsters like this in the world exist, I think your doubt is misplaced. https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/hiv-exposure-sex-crimes-snapchat-ghost-mode https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/hiv-exposure-sex-crimes-sna...
- confidantlake 6y ago
  https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-03-18/japanese-man-who-threatened-to-spread-coronavirus-dies-media https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-03-18/japane...
remote_phone 6y ago
They still haven’t definitively determined if it’s asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, or both that spread the disease.
pc86 6y ago
I sure can, if they're in the US. We're still in lockdown. My state just announced even stronger precautions which go into effect in about 6 hours. If you are spreading COVID in the US, whether or not you're symptomatic, it's a conscious choice.
SamBam 6y ago
Of course you can blame them, given what has publicly been known about the virus for months. This virus has been primarily spread by people who are pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic, particularly indoors and maskless. At this point, if you're indoors and maskless with anyone outside your family or "pod" you are completely culpable if you spread the disease. Probably not legally, but morally.

> People who are super social (or stupid + spreading the plague) What if somebody has asymptomatic covid infection? He or she spreads it without intent, you can not blame them.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> What if somebody has asymptomatic covid infection? He or she spreads it without intent, you can not blame them. Yes, given what is widely publicly known about the disease, I can very easily blame people who are involved engaging in high-spread-risk behavior despite being a-(or, more likely if they are actually spreading it, pre-)symptomatic and who are thereby spreading the virus they don’t know they have.

h3cate 6y ago
Harsh. Would you be comfortable convicting those people with attempted murder?
- input_sh 6y ago
  Not who you're replying to, but not for ignorance. On the other hand, if someone knows they've been exposed and still behave carelessly, I'm absolutely fine with charging people with attempted murder, endangering the public health, or something similar.
  - h3cate 6y ago
    I completely agree if you test positive and don't follow the isolation period then that's a problem. However op seems to be saying that if you go shopping (could be classed as high risk?), don't know you have the virus, and pass it on then that's a problem too? What's the difference between passing this on unintentionally and passing any other virus or disease unintentionally?
- dragonwriter 6y ago
  > Would you be comfortable convicting those people with attempted murder? No, attempted murder requires specific intent. For the most egregious conduct when they know they are at particularly high risk of being a spreader, even without intent, if someone actually dies, it might arguably be close to depraved-indifference rather than intent-to-kill murder, but more generally negligent homicide if they actually kill people and reckless endangerment, otherwise, would be closer selections from the generically-common American set of crimes. But I’m not arguing they should be criminally liable; saying that an act is not beyond moral blame is not the same that it technically fits — or, even if it does, should necessarily be prosecuted as — a crime.

ruffrey 6y ago

If they know it’s spreadable without symptoms, unfortunate, as is is, there’s a level of fault. Stupid is not a term I would use, though. Mingling with other people at a similar comfort level of contract Covid - that’s just adults being adults. That’s freedom. But if those people then go to unavoidable places like grocery stores, they’re putting people at risk who don’t have much of a choice.

h3cate 6y ago
Is there not home delivery where you live?
- greenyoda 6y ago
  Many people can't afford the extra cost of home delivery. And there isn't nearly enough home delivery capacity to support every shopper.

viztor 6y ago

I doubt any one would spread with intent, which is probably criminal.

mrkramer 6y ago
I was alluding to legal situation and term of Negligent homicide/Involuntary manslaughter; it is defined as "the killing of another person without the intent to kill, but where the person's death occurs as a result of the negligent or reckless actions of the defendant." In the situation of Covid it would be something like infecting another person without the intent to infect, but where the person's health might be endangered as a result of the negligent or reckless actions of the defendant (the one who spread the virus).
- throwaway201103 6y ago
  How does this differ from any other communicable disease with a non-zero mortality that someone might spread either unknowingly or negligently? E.g. influenza just to name one.
bbarnett 6y ago
When monsters like this in the world exist, I think your doubt is misplaced. https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/hiv-exposure-sex-crimes-snapchat-ghost-mode https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/hiv-exposure-sex-crimes-sna...
confidantlake 6y ago
https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-03-18/japanese-man-who-threatened-to-spread-coronavirus-dies-media https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2020-03-18/japane...

remote_phone 6y ago

They still haven’t definitively determined if it’s asymptomatic, pre-symptomatic, or both that spread the disease.

pc86 6y ago

I sure can, if they're in the US. We're still in lockdown. My state just announced even stronger precautions which go into effect in about 6 hours. If you are spreading COVID in the US, whether or not you're symptomatic, it's a conscious choice.

SamBam 6y ago

Of course you can blame them, given what has publicly been known about the virus for months. This virus has been primarily spread by people who are pre-symptomatic or asymptomatic, particularly indoors and maskless. At this point, if you're indoors and maskless with anyone outside your family or "pod" you are completely culpable if you spread the disease. Probably not legally, but morally.