4 ms·
This isn't about an emotionally charged issue. The discussion is about the legal test for negligence. It is an objective standard: what a reasonable person woul
by torstenvl 4y ago
This isn't about an emotionally charged issue. The discussion is about the legal test for negligence. It is an objective standard: what a reasonable person would do. The specifics of the individual are irrelevant.
- hackinthebochs 4y agoBut what does a "reasonable person" standard say when it comes to specialist knowledge? Why would a reasonable person not expect that an armorer who is responsible for ensuring the proper state of the gun is sufficient "due caution and circumspection"?