- Messages
- 3,669
- Reaction score
- 3
That's the problem with ignores...people end up quoting the people you are ignoring...oh well.Diver0001:* emphasis added by me
I actually think that what James is saying in the bit you quoted is also what AzAtty is saying. My take is that this (what James is saying) applies at least in the United States. It's also clear that there are "many" part of the world (some European countries for example) where this isn't the case at all.
R..
Actually I think you have that backwards. My statement was meant to apply outside the US, not in.
Just to be clear:
voop indicated that in his country they have duty to resuce laws. Here in the US, all states (I think) have good samaritan protection in some form or another. The former is usually an extension of the latter, and a few states here also have duty to rescue laws.
However, outside the US and other countries where these laws exist, there is no liablity protection under the law for good samaritans. In these areas (and in some with legal protection), once you take action, you then have a duty of care to follow. In some cases, simply following this duty of care is enough to provide you legal protection, in others even following duty of care does not provide you with protection.
These are the legal issues. The moral issues are an enitrely differnt story. IMHO, if you see someone in need of rescue, you should do so, but you should not volunteer any information about any training you may have.
James