- Joined
- Nov 30, 2021
- Messages
- 3,128
- Reaction score
- 9,674
Well, I actually have an anecdote relevant to this. It was some twelve years ago where I went out to a local bar that I liked around 4 PM and had an after-work pint. Then I had another. Then another. Then my buddy showed up, and his buddy after that, and started to get some shots. I indulged. Too much. I was more drunk than I have been since then. When offered a ride home by a sober friend I said no and walked home. I left my jacket there. It was -20 or below, and the walk was about 15 to 20 minutes. It took me over an hour. During the walk I stumbled and fell, and I had had enough to drink that I think I almost fell asleep. If I had, I would have been dead if I didn't wake up.
What did I do? I knowingly put myself into a risky situation when I had another option, and it is the closest I have (knowingly) come to death in the past 15 years. Ever since then, my buddies have rightly been calling me an idiot because I put myself at a stupid level of risk and I'm to blame for that. Yes, blame, because I had multiple opportunities to do differently and not put myself at risk which I didn't have to suffer through.
Now, make that situation not cold weather but "bad part of town" and it scans nicely. Yes, someone else is to blame as well - they are responsible if they commit a bad act against you. But you knew exactly the situation you were putting yourself into, you knew what it could lead to, and you stupidly said "Yeah, fuck it" and did it anyway. You can semantically niggle about whether it's to blame or not, but ought implies can - and if you can do something that keeps you out of severe risk, you should do it, and you're to blame if you don't.
If tomorrow I hop a flight to Chicago, go to the bank and take out a bunch of money, then go for a stroll through the worst part of town looking like this:
Every bit as much as if I had drunkenly walked into cold weather with no jacket I'd have made bad decisions for which I am responsible, when something bad happened to me. Your reasoning says I'm not to blame and pretty much invites me to do it. My reasoning keeps me safe.
And you know what my litmus test is for this "You're 0% to blame!" line being idealism - probably ideological - versus being an actual good way to conduct your life? I have daughters that I care about beyond the framing of rhetoric and ideology. Because of that, I won't tell them to feed bears, walk into sub-zero weather without proper outerwear, and put themselves in situations where they might get raped or mugged. If they do those things and they get hurt, they're still hurt, so however much I can argue my way into convincing myself and them that they're not to blame, I won't - it's just empty rhetoric when one of them gets hurt badly. They are being taught to be responsible for that because, at the end of the day, if they make a decision which drastically raises the chances of them getting murdered or raped when they could have done otherwise, that's on them, and they (and me) suffer for it.
And yes, you can try and weasel around this with a "But you're always a risk! If you drive a car, you put yourself at risk! What, do you expect people to live in a bubble or something?" There are reasonable risks and unreasonable risks. Your reasoning leaves my trip to Chicago dressed like this:
As something I bear zero responsibility for when I get shot for my bags of cash. Yes, it can be tough to find the line, but that's why I have a litmus test. If I won't teach my daughter some bullshit blanket stance of "Oh, you're never to responsible if someone mugs, murders, or rapes you no matter how you act" then it's ideological fluff and not a real way to approach risk assessment in your daily life. If they take stupid risks, then they are to blame for taking those risks and, to some degree, responsible what comes - so they will not learn what you're teaching. Do it with your daughters and pray it doesn't lead to bitter consequences.
Lastly, to quote myself for context, here's what I originally said:
"while I wouldn't go so far as to blame the victim for bad things happening to them, there are plenty of cases where the victim's actions absolutely invite what happens to them. I don't think this is one of of those cases"
This is relevant to my statement on this case rather than general principles. If you respond trying to drag me into saying I'm blaming the OP's victim, just be clear that I don't know enough about the risks he took to judge and I recognize that.
