I think where the argument breaks down is the use of the information.
Twitter guy is providing information. Should that information be used by a drunk driver to avoid a checkstop then should the onus not still remain on the guy who decided to get wasted and drive?
Information is just information until someone decides to use it for illegal or immoral purposes, but at that point should not the person who made that decision be held responsible?
If people want to use Twitter guy's heads up for their own innocuous purposes then so be it. If some choose to use it for their own gain then they should assume the risk associated with that decision.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDutch
Now take the drunk driver. They take and alternate route due to information you provided, and hit someone in a cross walk, killing them instantly. Would you want the person who assisted in the crime by posting the check stop on twitter to face justice? at least morally?
|
Why? At the end of the day the person in the crosswalk was killed by a drunk driver. Someone who made his own decisions. The fact that he took an alternate route seems irrelevant because you're trying to attribute blame elsewhere to Twitter guy rather than the drunk driver and thats wrong because Twitter guy isnt forcibly pouring beer down Johnny '10 pints' throat.
Not to mention, you can take the example as far as you want to. Let me show you:
What if Twitter guy makes no updates and the drunk driver plows into the Checkstop bus and kills 15 cops. Should he be held responsible then for not supplying the drunk with an alternate route?