Fatal Youtube stunt

[Smokey Deza]

She didn't set up or test the stunt she pulled the trigger. If you were some assistant on a movie set who triggered the explosion are you liable to be charged even if the guy killed was the one who designed the stunt/did the initial test etc.. and instructed you to push the button?

Except by law they'll be stringent health and safety checks to wade through before even attempting such a stunt. But despite this being adhered to alongside the many other precautions put in place, accidents and fatalities do still happen. And whether that be down to human error or something completely out of their control, **** happens in this line of work.

This debable on the other hand was completely avoidable. All in an asinine attempt at claiming fame.

Apples and oranges...

The difference here is that she is stupid and a reasonable person should have known it wouldn't work. But you're also happy that someone really stupid (someone with a mental condition) shouldn't be charged.

I wouldn't be happy about it. I would factor in that it's entirely possible that someone with severe mental impairment, who doesn't even know what day of the weeks it is, or cannot talk fluently etc, potentially didn't know what they were doing. Better I don't expand on this however, as it's another farcry anology.

 

[dowie]

I didn't mean happy in that you'd be joyful but just that you'd be happy to agree/accept.

The analogies were there to illustrate a point, pointing out that they're something different etc.. doesn't really change the point. I don't doubt that stunt people go through risk assessments etc.. that is irrelevant to my point - the point is that there exist stunts where there is a risk of death, someone might well be in a position where they trigger a stunt (that they believe to be set up correctly) and something goes wrong resulting in a death.

This was also a stunt albeit an amateur one carried out rather badly, but the woman pulling the trigger was doing as she'd been instructed by the person who'd set up (and supposedly tested) the stunt.

The youtube clip I posted was in principle the same scenario of one person shooting at another hoping an object between them would stop the bullet(s) - the difference being the object placed between them is rather more reasonable for the stunt and that it is stupid to think a book would work in the same way. I'd suspect that if it were the boss shooting at the employee then that would be a different ball game but it was an employee being instructed to shoot at the boss in a 'test' presumably the boss came up with. I'd hope that if the product failed or something went wrong in that stunt then the employee wouldn't be charged with manslaughter.

 

[Dianbobo]

I genuinely worry for her children