4 ms·

Depending on the circumstances, absolutely. Assuming that serious unjustified injury or death would occur if they failed to act, there should be some legal wind

Depending on the circumstances, absolutely. Assuming that serious unjustified injury or death would occur if they failed to act, there should be some legal window in which they’re allowed to prevent the harm. Private companies (and individuals) should not be required to stand by helplessly while people are hurt. Indeed, legally, private individuals and companies are allowed to act in emergencies. For example, I generally should not break into my neighbor’s home. However, I am legally allowed (and morally obligated) to forcibly enter their residence if their house is on fire, or they’re being attacked by a burglar, etc. and I am able to prevent some of the harm. Of course, if we assume we’re talking about situations where the government needs a warrant, the legality becomes more complicated. At what point does something become an emergency? I would say it’s not an emergency if there is time to inform the government and to let the government prevent the injury. If we assume the government is unwilling or unable to act, then the window for action should expand by some measure.

comprev 3y ago
You mean something like citizen's arrest? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest
- goodluckchuck 3y ago
  Exactly. Indeed, in Phoenix v State, 455 So.2d 1024, the Florida Supreme Court implies that a private citizen could request and receive a warrant to arrest a felon. They say the citizen could be excused for failing to obtain a warrant by proving the person arrested was actually guilty.
rnk 3y ago
This is obviously a bad idea, private companies or individuals having the power to arrest people because they want to? Look at the recent few years of history in the US where multiple experienced and distinguished (at least by resume), members of the us govt, senators, reps, tried to subvert an elections, dozens of lawyers told them it was illegal, we have their email and texts telling them. That group still acted to do many illegal actions, lie about it, tried to cover it up. And they still deny any problems with their behavior and choices. Private companies having arrest rights is just a nonstarter of an idea (putting it kindly).
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

comprev 3y ago

You mean something like citizen's arrest? https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen%27s_arrest

goodluckchuck 3y ago
Exactly. Indeed, in Phoenix v State, 455 So.2d 1024, the Florida Supreme Court implies that a private citizen could request and receive a warrant to arrest a felon. They say the citizen could be excused for failing to obtain a warrant by proving the person arrested was actually guilty.

rnk 3y ago

This is obviously a bad idea, private companies or individuals having the power to arrest people because they want to? Look at the recent few years of history in the US where multiple experienced and distinguished (at least by resume), members of the us govt, senators, reps, tried to subvert an elections, dozens of lawyers told them it was illegal, we have their email and texts telling them. That group still acted to do many illegal actions, lie about it, tried to cover it up. And they still deny any problems with their behavior and choices. Private companies having arrest rights is just a nonstarter of an idea (putting it kindly).

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]