5 ms·
Aren't there many new laws nowadays where there is strict liability, intent is not needed? And on top of that there is the entire section of negligence law, wit
by mahyarm 13y ago
Aren't there many new laws nowadays where there is strict liability, intent is not needed? And on top of that there is the entire section of negligence law, with no intent by definition, which is easier than you think to get caught in.
- rayiner 13y agoThere are strict liability violations, but they tend to be things like traffic ordinances, not felonies. For example driving a motor vehicle in a wilderness is a strict liability offense, though its a misdemeanor punishable potentially by jail time. I think those are very troubling, and I'm against jail time for any non-violent crime, but they're not that pervasive. But lots of otherwise troubling laws aren't strict liability. E.g. Child pornography possession requires knowledge of both possession and its status as child pornography. Drug laws are generally not strict liability. Negligence law is civil, not criminal, except to the extent that reckless disregard is a state of mind satisfying intent requirements for a few limited gross negligence crimes (e.g. Locking the doors of a tightly packed nightclub).