7 ms·
One should mention that this is applied to civil liability not criminal (in Germany).
by chopin 4y ago
One should mention that this is applied to civil liability not criminal (in Germany).
- cf141q5325 4y agoHe mentioned this as well ( and i forgot to) Could you elaborate on the implications/relevance? It seemed important to you and him. edit: So is it lawyers being pedantic (no offense, its the job description after all) or is there an argument why the logic of criminal law would be more applicable here?
- leobg 4y agoLawyer here in Germany. I don’t actually know the answer. However, criminal law and civil law regulate different relationships. Criminal law regulates the relationship between the state and the individual. Civil law regulates the relationships between individuals. Criminal law is bound much more closely by the constitution. Specifically, the state may not punish an individual for engaging in lawful behavior. So while another citizen may raise the objection, “But you chose to drive this two ton machine knowing full well that it was capable to inflict harm on other people even when driven with the greatest care”, the state may not. Also, for civil liability, there is (mandatory) insurance. You, as a driver, do not usually end up paying for this (provided that you have not been negligent in your conduct of the machine). Criminal law, on the other hand, always hits you as the individual. You cannot insure against it. This is to say that, if the same standard were applied in criminal law, nobody could afford to drive a car, or operate any dangerous equipment at all, because one mistake, or even just one instance of bad luck, could land you in prison.
- robonerd 4y agoThe relevance is difference between getting sued and getting thrown in prison.
- cf141q5325 4y agoI was aware of that. But unless you make the argument that a suicide programming would be a hard coded death penalty for careless driving, and as such only possible under criminal law, i still dont see how its relevant to the example at hand. Could you elaborate?
- robonerd 4y agoI have no clue what you mean by "suicide programming" and I don't see the relevance of the death penalty (criminal manslaughter would not get you sentenced to death even in America), so no I can't elaborate on that.
- cf141q5325 4y ago>suicide programming The autonomous car crashing itself with you on board instead of running over a child. Its what these posts here are about if you look at the initial post. The question is, does the distinction that the rational of implied culpability only applies to civil law have any relevance for this example? You answered that one gets you thrown in prison and the other sued. I dont see the relevance of this for the question at hand. I didnt see the relevance of the death penalty either, i was guessing how criminal law might be more applicable then civil law. And its the only thing i could come up with.
- robonerd 4y agoI admit you have me confused, but I'm sure I don't want my car to kill me to spare me from a lawsuit. For that matter, killing me to spare me from a criminal manslaughter conviction is quite a raw deal too!