Since when did it become against the law to be branded? Just because a Beta brands a "B" on his shoulder, doesn't mean its a Beta event and Beta (HQ) can be held responsible for any infection/loss that may be a result of the brand. Unless something was forced upon them or they were made to do it or it was a requirement for entrance into the org....etc., the org. cannot be held accountable. If someone chose to do this on their own, they're the only ones who can be held accountable.
But, if what you are saying is "If you affiliate with a GLO, and something randomly happens where someone else is injured, that person can sue that GLO because you are a member of it", then I guess your thoughts are correct.
But, I don't believe that.
ETA: I know a kid, who branded an 'Omega' on his shoulder when he was a freshman in college. He then proceeded to initiate into Phi Delta Theta. Then, he found out that the 'Omega' stood for Omega Psi Phi, and not 'something cool that his football and basketball playing idols' did.
Can Omega Psi Phi be sued for this kid being a dumbass? Absolutely not.
Quote:
Originally posted by CarolinaCutie
You cannot compare this event with branding. Jamaica and raves have nothing to do with Beta. Someone getting a brand with Beta Theta Pi obviously involves Beta. Particularly because I would imagine, in most cases, it's difficult to brand yourself. And somehow I doubt that the majority of brands are done by legit tattoo/body modification parlors. If a brother is branding a brother or pledge, or a pledge is branding a pledge, how can Beta not be somewhat implicated?
ktsnake, I agree with you. Really, really good risk management means not only making sure you're not breaking the law, but not doing anything that would make anyone THINK you're breaking the law. I wouldn't want to call my national office and tell them that we were branding each other, either. Not because of hazing laws, but because I actually care about the reputation of my chapter.
|