Quote:
Originally Posted by Onesie
Point is, what a sad life one must lead if they only do the right thing if required by law…
I’m not telling people what they should or shouldn’t do.
I’m saying it’s sadistic and sad that someone can film someone trapped in a car in flames.
3- I’m not wrong.
In regards to your doctor example, it’s silly in many counts but I’ll mention a few:
1- you’re assuming the person was imprudent. What if he fell ill and has an infant in the backseat? His foot was on the floor, which is what causes the engine to fail and spread fire on the grass. He was unconscious. By the accident or, more likely, before the accident (which maybe caused it, he’s on the strip, it’s impossible to race on the strip…)
2- you’re implying the person filming had to make a choice of not saving his life but save someone else’s life. Whose? There is not if/else here. It’s one case. Except “save this person or film it”.
3- you’ll be surprised to learn that a doctor will save the pedo-rapist and not the cop if his condition is slightly more critical. Doctors don’t think like you (thank goodness, imagine if lives weren’t saved based on character, you wouldn’t get that surgery you need because the doctor disagrees with your life choices). They even “can’t” think like you. It’s the oath they take.
I guess there was a lot you learned today.
1- no law needed to save someone, but a Good Samaritan law does exist.
2- cars don’t explode
3- never assume a cause of an accident
4- doctors take an oath to practice their calling
Call me if there’s more.
|
I thought that you could debate like an adult but you're obviously getting emotional and hence your logic is failing, regrets for that.
What sad life, because I don't want to risk for someone who doesn't care about his? I think it's more sad to just react and not analyze the situation properly, potentially adding to the problem instead of the solution; e.g. you didn't even realize that he was filming before the fire started, never mind that there were ppl already there, yet you expected the video dude to just drop everything and cross into a busy road to be an extra. Again, we're just the peanut gallery here and going w only what we have, which is just as-is, I'd take it back if the facts show otherwise, but if you wanna wager, which is more likely, it being a pure accident or due to his actions?
Naw, you're making an assumption about the video guy but ironically giving the doubt benefit to the driver, so many ridiculous assumptions it's not even worth addressing...what if Jesus was in the backseat, or the President? Cmon man. There's nothing inherently 'sadistic' about filming, stop sensationalizing it, would it make you happier if the video guy turned out to be 80 years old? Pt is, you can't force someone if they aren't comfortable w it, period. Not sure why you think ppl should be compelled? You do you, stop 'meddling' into what others should do esp if it is potentially dangerous, or are you gonna foot that bill if something happened to the video guy? Didn't think so. You go be Superman if you were on the scene, but you're not, so you can only signal your would-be heroics here while denigrate the dude for whatever illogical reason.
You're trying to distort the dr example. OBVIOUSLY I'm talking about the 2 patients having the exact same condition, cmon.... At least argue properly. If I was the dr, I'd take the police all day, to say you'd help the pedo first is just ridiculous.
Again, wrong about cars not exploding. It may be rare but are you telling me in the whole history of vehicles not one exploded? You bet your life? You slipped up by making an absolute statement.