Steve2009

I don't see how that is inhumane. These are the rules that have been decided by society over time. I'm also not a lawyer so I don't know if this type of situation would be within the terms of the civil liability act. Other similar types of situations would be however.

A person who knowingly engages in risky behaviour and receives an injury is very different to a person who receives an injury due to their deception by another who is aware of that risk.

Engaging in unprotected anal intercourse with a drug addict prostitute in my opinion would seem to represent a significant level of obvious risk. Engaging in unprotected sex with your spouse is a different proposition.

paulry

Okay. Wrong choice of words because no normal adult can possibly be innocent - except maybe for Susan Boyle. I should have used the word unsuspecting wife instead. And unsuspecting husbands too for those situations where the wife is the one doing the curb crawling.

Steve2009

Blameless? Innocent/Guilt reduces it to a binary decision. I'd prefer to think of it as a scale of blame.

eddie007

Glad that you're the kind of person who can look at a situation/person and feel comfortable with assigning a scale of blame to it...

Personally its not something I feel capeable of when discussing drug addiction or sexual behaviours ... Aquisition of infections... That kind of thing ... Way too complex... Too many variables, influncing factors, individual circumstances for me

So I dont "blame"

Steve2009

I'm merely interpreting what I believe the courts would have to say on the matter. I do believe that the principles of tort negligence are fair. Only a judge can decide on actual blame, I am not one. I'm very glad that there are judges, there are advocates, and there are laws.

FYI, assigning scales of blame is exactly what judges in civil cases have to do.

eddie007

And looking after victims of drug abuse and sexually risky beahviours is what some nurses do... But they tend to just get on with it and not worry about whether they are to blame for their illness...

I dont judge...

Steve2009

Do you think that it is a necessary or positive quality of a human being that they don't judge? Giving someone care and holding them responsible for their actions are two wholly separate issues and they are not mutually exclusive. I thank god that we do have the system of justice we have. Otherwise we'd be savages.

eddie007

Some people believe those that judge others are savages... Holding people accountable isnt the same as being judgemental either... But we appear to be at cross purposes here, so I will bow out

Steve2009

I've just realised that your last post has tried to misconstrue my argument as "blaming" an addict. Bow out if you like, but I must clarify that this was never my argument, and I was referring to users of male prostitutes who subsequently infect their blameless/unsuspecting wives. The straw man is a pretty low debate tactic.

eddie007

And I was under the impression from your posts that you were blaming people for their addictions and unfortunate consequences of risky behaviour, as opposed to down right criminal behaviour...

So it appears we are both at fault.....

One of the risks of posting on forums.... Risk of miscontruction

eddie007

Its here I "went wrong" and misinterpreted you, i apologise

Steve2009

Aha, no harm, no fowl. Apologies for any confusion.

eddie007

What a warm and fuzzy place the barbie is this evening.... Now where can I go and create havoc?

Pollyana

You? Havoc? Try here, its gone all quiet again!!

IvanM

The shooting gallery in Kings X Sydney has been running for a number of years now. It means users are less likely to OD and if they do they are in safe hands. The effect has been less deaths, lower HIV rates and the area is safer without OD ers passed out on the streets.

The low HIV rates mean a saving to taxpayers.