Is this a crime

[crhoades]

Not entirely sure about this but you sound correct.

 

[Stublore]

...


I don't think that a standard civilian would be penalised for not attempting a rescue (although in the case of able-bodied young males, they would have more of a duty than, say, the old and infirm).

And what a nice example of a sexist comment.
(Is that enough not to trigger a short post warning?).

 

[Leemaster777]

I'm going to refer to my old standby in situations like this:

If you have to ask if it's illegal, it probably is.

I can only think of a scant few times I've uttered this question, and it WASN'T "yes".

 

[Quaxar]

If it is it shouldn't be. Forcing people who don't have the necessary training to try to help is just as likely to hurry death along as keep it at bay.

Because clearly calling emergency services won't change a thing. If you've got the choice between not helping and letting him die and helping with the worst case he dies anyway what makes you think you should rather not do anything?

I don't know international laws but I know here it is your duty to "help as far as you are able to". This means basically everyone is obliged to call emergency services, this does not for example mean you can or in any way should attempt to save a drowning person. Anyone except for a lifeguard should do this, seriously.
Also, to get your driver's licence you are required to take an 8-hour first-aid course (although I'm a firm supporter of at least 16-hours plus refreshment every two years) so in theory you should have some knowledge about things like CPR and it's just to bridge the time until the ambulance arrives anyway. Better wrong than nothing, might even be enough to prevent serious brain damage.

So yeah, I'm totally for "either this is a crime or it should damn-well be".

 

[fundayz]

Just abandoning somebody to die like that would be a chargeable offense in America, as you are in the power to do something about that person's death, and do nothing. It'd be the same as claiming that by not hitting the breaks when somebody trips in front of your car while crossing, you didn't kill them, momentum did. You intentionally allowed them to die.

You obviously don't know how law works in the US. There is NO law that mandates you to save someone's life even if you have the means to do it.

Your analogy is invalid:

If you had enough time to stop but didn't then you made an active decision to hit the person; momentum might have killed the person but YOU were controlling that momentum.

If you were obeying all traffic rules and a person jumped out unexpectedly and got hit then you wouldn't be liable as it would have been that person's fault that they got it.

 

[kradx]

Depends where you live, in some countries you have to (at least) call for help(police, fire brigade or ambulance).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue

It is still a moral duty.

 

[fundayz]

Yes. Negligence. We all have a duty of care and we are expected to intervene or alert authorities.

When my partner was in kindergarten a boy in his class had a seizure and died. The teacher ended up going to court and was given weekend detention for twelve (I think) months because they did not do anything in their power to help. The teacher thought he was mucking around.

So yeah, it's a crime. You have to help.

No it is not. There is a HUGE difference between letting a person under your care die and letting a random stranger die.

The example you give is a crime because the teacher was the appointed adult responsible for the children's well-being. Since you are not the person responsible for a sinking stranger's well being you are not liable.

Shoudl there be a law that forces you to save people in peril? Maybe, some countries DO have these laws, but the fact remains that there is no such law in the US or Canada.

 

[Tanakh]

And what a nice example of a sexist comment.
(Is that enough not to trigger a short post warning?).

Really? I find it a little juvenile and naive to think of it as sexist. The average very old people will probably put themselves at risk when getting a person out of quicksand, the average able-bodied young man won't.

Do you find for example the declaration of protection of woman and children (http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/protectionwomen.htm) from the ohchr sexist?

For me it just makes sense to protect the most vulnerable, and in our human society a woman usually is more vulnerable than a man.

 

[SillyBear]

Yes. Negligence. We all have a duty of care and we are expected to intervene or alert authorities.

When my partner was in kindergarten a boy in his class had a seizure and died. The teacher ended up going to court and was given weekend detention for twelve (I think) months because they did not do anything in their power to help. The teacher thought he was mucking around.

So yeah, it's a crime. You have to help.

No it is not. There is a HUGE difference between letting a person under your care die and letting a random stranger die.

The example you give is a crime because the teacher was the appointed adult responsible for the children's well-being. Since you are not the person responsible for a sinking stranger's well being you are not liable.

Eh.. What is it with this forum and the hostile tone? HUGE DIFFERENCE HARAHRAHRAHRH!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence

It's not that hard to do research man.

 

[Linolium25]

I believe there is a law in the US that is a Good Someritan Law, which means you must help a person who's dying or being robbed et. if you can, so, yeah, if the man is drowning in quicksand there, it's illegal not to help him, as well as it is immoral.

 

[teebeeohh]

depends, are you taking pictures?

 

[Tdc2182]

Depends on the country.

In the US, the least you have to do is inform the Emergency responders.

 

[Rawne1980]

Just for those that keep saying yes to it being a legal matter in the USA.

In the common law of the United States and other anglosphere countries, there is no general duty to come to the rescue of another.[1] Generally, a person cannot be held liable for doing nothing while another person is in peril

There is NO law saying you have to help.

Those mentioning the Good Samaritan Law.

In some jurisdictions, unless a caretaker relationship (such as a parent-child or doctor-patient relationship) exists prior to the illness or injury, or the "good Samaritan" is responsible for the existence of the illness or injury, no person is required to give aid of any sort to a victim.

Taken from

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law

So no, you have no legal obligation whatsoever in some countries (read United States and United Kingdom) to help anyone in peril.

It's a bit of a pricks move to leave someone you could help but in the US and UK at least, you are not legally bound to help anyone.

 

[Tdc2182]

I believe there is a law in the US that is a Good Someritan Law, which means you must help a person who's dying or being robbed et. if you can, so, yeah, if the man is drowning in quicksand there, it's illegal not to help him, as well as it is immoral.

I'm pretty sure the Good Samaritan law just protects you from prosecution if you accidentally do harm to someone who you are trying to save.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Good_Samaritan_law

Then again, it's different in a few places.

 

[Woodsey]

I think it is here (UK). You're expected to call the emergency services, although not put yourself in harm's way.

 

[mjc0961]

I would say it depends on circumstances. If you had no phone or there was no phone signal so you couldn't get a call out, and there wasn't anything around you could use to try and help, I think it'd be a really shit move if they tried to charge you with anything. Of course, if there was something you could do but didn't, then charge away.

 

[Kanatatsu]

Lawyer here. In most countries, including the US and Canada, it is not a crime. There is not such thing as an enforced "good samaritan" law in most countries.

The notable exceptions are a few countries in Europe, where you would be required to call emergency at least. France is an example there.

Note: there are many countries where there is a protection for good samaritans against being sued for wrongdoing (Canada is an example).

 

[puffy786]

Its not a crime since you aren't required by law to save anyone if its not your job but you are a jackass if you let the person die if your life wasn't endangered if you were to try and save the person.

 

[Grospoliner]

Depends on your country, but yes http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duty_to_rescue

Edit: Ah didn't see it already linked. Meh.

 

[fundayz]

Eh.. What is it with this forum and the hostile tone? HUGE DIFFERENCE HARAHRAHRAHRH!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_negligence

It's not that hard to do research man.

Way to do "research" and still not know what you are talking about...

Criminal negligence only applies when you have an appointed responsibility.

For exmpale, if a supervisor's negligence results in a worker's death then he'd be responisble, if a teacher's negligence results in a student's death then they would be responsible, if a nurse's negligence results in a patient's death then they would be responsible.

You have absolutely no responsibility for a stranger's well being and as such you are not required by law to aid them.

In North American there is absolutely no law that requires you to save a stranger's life. There is a universal moral duty to do so, but no a law.