|
I was going with the "waited 10 hours" to get the guy help as support for the let him die.
I was really stating what I thought ought to be the case, rather than trying to say anything about what was legally true.
I think we need to go back more to individual responsibility for our actions. As a society, we're letting people shift blame on to others too much.
As a individual member of a GLO, I don't think the members of the group behaved in a moral and ethical way if the account from the paper is accurate. It seems really strange and sad to me that only major lawsuits and criminal charges are considered motivating in keeping groups from acting this way. The main reason that you don't let members drink themselves to death shouldn't be your insurance policy.
On the other hand, this was group that the guy freely chose to be associated with, and I suspect he knew kind of what was going to happen to him that night (except for his death, of course), and he went along with it. My guess is that he took health in high school and may have even had seminars and classes in colleges about the dangers of alcohol. People should have been looking out for him, and one of the people is the guy himself.
There were a lot of things that could have happened differently and the guy would still be alive; one of the most straightforward would have been his choosing not to go or not to drink. He paid for that decision with his life, but I'm still not sure that makes the other guys responsible for his death. (But I'm still thinking it through.)
|
Threaded Mode
