Quote:
Why should you accept guilt for their crime when you told them not to do it? |
That is to say, at least, if you saying it was the reason, and by not saying it, this could be avoided. If you couldn't help it, you couldn't help it.
Which is generally the rule: whether a human is or is not in the equation, you're equally responsible. if you tried to kill someone by means of an emotionally unstable person, or by means of poison, it's murder. If you make an accidental comment and it, outside of your control, backfires, you're less responsible, but not because a person was involved: you're less responsible because it was an accidental act and it backfired outside of your control.
Quote:
Edit: Let's say person L really wants to kill someone. They tell you that they are planning on killing Person M. You convince them that killing person M is a bad idea and they tell you that they won't do it. They still secretly want to kill someone though and go out and kill person K without saying anything about it. Should you hold yourself responsible for the death of person K? I say no. Even though your actions contributed to person K's death, you in no way attempted to harm person K and did not harm them through negligence. For the sake of this argument assume that you don't have the power to stop person L and that they kill person K before you can do anything to stop it. |