In a perfect world, there wouldn’t have been a shooting in the first place, but that’s beside the point.
If he’s too apathetic (or cowardly) to even call for help, what makes you think he would have bothered to draw a weapon?
It’s terrible that things like this happen, but I’ve always had a problem with passing laws making it mandatory to offer aid.
For example, (not necessarily analagous to this situation, however), say I’m out in the middle of nowhere, driving through the desert. The temperature is 110 degrees. I see someone on the side of the road whose car has apparently broken down, gesturing for me to pull over and help him out. In those conditions, the man’s life could very well be in danger.
Now, if I’m legally obligated to help him, what’s to keep some unscrupulous person from creating a setup where he only appears to be stranded, when, in fact, he’s just waiting in ambush for some sucker to stop?
Now, I’m not saying that I wouldn’t stop and help a guy out in that situation, but I sure wouldn’t want a law demanding that I do, without being able to legally use my own judgment.
Don’t most people take some kind of first aid back in highschool- raise the legs and cover victem to prevent shock? Stanch bleeding (although I’m prettty sure you’re not supposed to use a touriquette on a head wound 
)?
But even if you’re not moved by compasssion for the suffering of you’re fellow man to risk getting you’re good winter coat all bloody, would it kill you (and I mean that to be bitterly ironic…) to call 911 before you drive off?
What kind of effort does that take? I mean, I’d think even the Not-So-Great Priest and the Mediocre Levite could have managed that much.
This reminds me of my school days… He should have called out a “REDO” plain and simple.
Wouldn’t the charge be somethign like negligence?
Refusing to help a dying person isn’t against the law?
vanilla, check Seraphim’s post above. IANAL, but I don’t know of any laws that require your average bystander to lend aid. However, I know that I would at the very least check in the gas station to see if the situation was being taken care of (perhaps someone had already run in to call an ambulance), and if not I would call myself. Merely getting back into your car and leaving - so soon after the DC-area shooting spree and the terrorist warnings - is amazingly cold.
Why does the final episode of Seinfeld keep running through my head?
Well, if i heard the news report right (see link provided by Larry Mudd, above), the guy bled to death, and bleeding, especially external, cna often be slowed or staunched by a relatively inexperienced person. Plenty of people have survived gunshot wounds to the head, and the very least a bystander could do was call for help and then see what could be done for the victim before the ambulance arrives.
I have no idea about about the law regarding helping someone in such a situation, but i certainly share the OP’s moral outrage at the fucker who just stood by and pumped gas. I could understand cowering behind one’s car during the actual shooting - i’m sure i’d be scared shitless. No-one expects you to run out and take a bullet for someone you don’t know. But is it really too much to ask that you try and do something to help a guy who’s just been shot?
And, on a final note, i think it’s interesting that Brutus’s idea of a perfect world is one in which you can shoot someone else before he shoots you, rather than one in which no-one shoots anyone.
Maybe the failure to act was BECAUSE of the recent sniper activity? Whether that people became jaded, or were so shellshocked by it that any similar activity caused people to be to afraid to act for fear of their own lives? As in “maybe if we pretend we don’t notice we won’t get shot as well”?
Just wondering, I live in a relatively small city, and am not exposed to “out in the open” crime such as the one described here.
I think it fits in perfectly with Brutus’s MO.
And the witness guy is scum, but there shouldn’t be laws forcing people to help. Something like that would have to be broadly defined, which would lead to trouble (what, your friend didn’t stop you from eating McDonald’s fries? they could kill you! Arrest that man!!)
There are no laws that say you *must/i] provide assistance in an emergency. The law itself would be too dangerous – e.g. you wouldn’t want someone with no training to rush into a burning buidling like Superman because the law says you must help. Such a law would risk having unqualified people putting themselves in danger.
Remember, the first rule of rescue is that you don’t do something that will result in the need for you to be rescued as well.
That being said, the guy at the gas station is a cretin! An absolute, cad whose inaction was morally bankrupt and ethically reprehensible.
The fuckwad.
Dammit! I hate it when I don’t preview and I made a coding error! Grrrrr!
Not only that, but in the news video hosted at the free site (link above), the news anchor clearly says that police believe that if someone had called for authorities, the man probably would have survived. So even if the kerosene-pumping fucker didn’t know jack shit about rendering aid, he sure as hell knew how to operate a phone.
To take the other side for a minute:
Suppose the guy does offer the victim aid but it doesn’t help and the victim dies. With the way the world is I could see the deceased’s family suing the man for improperly lending aid when he was unqualified to do so. Now he’s got a nice lawsuit in his lap for trying to help someone.
It’s happened before and it can happen again.
This is just a general response to the thread. Why does everyone have to bring morals and ethics into everything?? Maybe the “witness” had better things to do with his time than call 911 and stand around answering questions from all the cops that showed up? Maybe he had a job to go do, or a family waiting for the kerosine to fill up a space heater. What about the gas station attendants?? Everyone is so keen on hanging some poor bastard pumping gas out to dry, what about the station employees who just watched the victim bleed to death on camera?? I didnt see or read anything about the people who worked there lifting a finger to help either. Also,I have a question for all of the people saying that the “witness” should have done something, do any of you stop to help when you see a car accident on the highway? People could be dead there too. If you dont stop to help at something like that, then you are no beter than the man who bought his kerosine and left. Not stopping to help for car wrecks is no diffrent than this “witness” not helping in this situation.
As a matter of fact, yes, I do.
Even with the smaller stuff – e.g. A few weeks ago I drove a girl to the hospital when she wiped out on the streetcar tracks with her bike. We came out of our office, splinted her ankle.
Job to go to? Family waiting? Yes, and yes. But my boss understood and was just as glad to help, and a quick call to my SO to let her know I’d be late. No sweat.
I’m sure the cops would smooth things over with your boss if you had to call in late.
You have GOT. To be. Kidding.
If any station attendants saw the guy bleeding and did nothing, I think they’re scum too. It’s just that I can’t comprehend how you can stand next to someone who’s obviously in deep trouble and just glance over at them, then walk away like nothing happened.
Occasionally, pulling over to “help” at car wrecks can cause more of a hazard - additional vehicles pulled over can be hit by passing motorists, or if the wrecked car explodes, it could become engulfed in flames as well. That being said, if I saw a car wreck that was obviously new and didn’t have someone standing outside the car talking on a phone, etc., then I would at least call 911 and notify the cops. I have also pulled over in a torrential rainstorm when I saw a car go sliding off the highway and hit a fence; I got over as soon as I could and ran through the rain towards his car, only to see him walking up the offramp to the nearby gas station, so I returned to my car.
If it makes you feel any better, though, perhaps you should wear a “don’t bother calling 911 if you’re too busy” sign on your chest, just so we know not to waste pangs of conscience if you’re bleeding in the middle of the sidewalk.
Most juristictions have a kind of “good samaritan” clause of some kind. The survivors may file a lawsuit, but unless horrendously gross negligence can be established, the lawsuits generally don’t get far.
There was a recent court case in this area. A man on a bike fell and stopped breathing. Some cops and a bystander performed CPR. The family tried to sue because moving the man with a head/spinal injury (which was necessary while performing CPR) may have contributed to his death. Without CPR, the man was guaranteed – 100%, no doubt about, absolutely for sure – to die. The CPR might have saved his life. The courts do take that into consideration and the cops and bystander were cleared of wrong-doing.
There has to be really clear-cut neglignece for such a suit to be successful, ie/ “What? He was on fire so I held him underwater for fifteen minutes. Was that bad?”
Well, we bring morals and ethics into discussions such as this because that is part of what makes us human.
It is impossible to avoid these issues. The paradox is that despite your question, your whole post is an exercise in comparative ethics. For example:
-
You make an argument about the relative importance of helping a dying stranger on the one hand, and fulfilling your obligations to employer or family on the other.
-
You make a comparison between the guy pumping gas and the gas station attendant, opining that the latter should also share some responsibility in this case.
-
You compare helping a person who has been shot right in front of you to stopping for a car accident, asserting that they are essentially equivalent.
Every single one of these would be appropriate issues to discuss in a university class on ethics. See, you can’t break out of this problem even if you want to.
And, in answer to your question about car accidents:
I haven’t seen that many. When i do see one, i look to see how many people have already stopped, and whether or not police and ambulance are already there. If there are plenty of people around, and it looks like i would just get in the way (i have no specialized medical training) then i drive on.
Since i’ve lived in my current apartment, there have been a few rather bad accidents on the nearest corner. On more than one occasion i have called 911 in such cases, and have run out to the corner to see if i can be of assistance. I have also brought two uninjured accident victims into my apartment and allowed them to use my phone, have a drink, etc., etc.
And i think that about 99% of the population would do the same thing.