badgenome said:
The extent to which someone should be held responsible for another's actions really ought to depend on intent. If I provide you with a tool knowing you intend to use it as a murder weapon, sure, that's rather different than if I sell you a hammer and you go beat somebody to death with it. On the other hand, I don't really feel entirely cool with the idea that a bar is responsible for a person who drank there getting in a car and drunkenly running someone over. |
I totally agree. I work in a bar, and that's a bullshit law.
But that's just one facet of a problem. Let's not use an axe, but a scalpel to fix the problems.
I'm not against someone selling someone else a gun...personally, I would never do it because that just creeps me out.
Selling someone a hammer wouldn't really work though because there's no way you could know what they were using it for. You can think of it like, post-crime.... would you say "how was I supposed to know" with a hammer? Yes. Yes you would. But if you sold someone a gun, that's different, isn't it?
Or if you went to a club, and I sold you extacy, I would be worried about you until you got home safely. Or I might even go with you to keep you out of trouble. Know what I mean? Then, there's a difference if it's some 14 year old who then kills someone with a hammer. In fact, I probably would not sell someone a hammer while I was selling them drugs either :D