Who Is To Blame For Our Actions :: essays research papers

Assumption of Risk Who is to Blame For Our Actions     The doctrine of "assumption of risk" intelligibly defines the responsibilityof all voluntary actions taken on by individuals, independent of the inherentrisk or danger involved with such actions. Are we that to assume responsibilityfor the positive outcomes of our actions, without also accepting the negativeoutcomes as well? Most individuals only claim responsibility in cases in whichthey be fully responsible for their actions. Living within a country whichhouses a large amount of private enterprise, we often find ourselves relying onoutside help. In many occasions we, the individual seeking assistance, hold thepower to choose which avenue of help will be taken. In these cases in which wehave the choice, should we non also be held responsible for the outcomes of ourdecisions, especially in cases in which we have been pre-warned about anyinherent risks or dangers? For example, When we take it upon ourselves to driveon a private road, smoke cigarettes, work for a mining company, or fly on adiscount airway at our own volition, do we tacitly consent to takeresponsibility for any outcome these actions may hold? The "assumption of risk"doctrine seems to ignore the fundamental obligation of entities to ensure their immanent goals. The distinguishing factor in deciding responsibility infaultless cases which call on the "assumption of risk" doctrine is the controlheld by individuals after the built in bed has begun. In accordance, companiessuch as discount airlines and cigarette companies must take on theresponsibility of completing their duties, while individuals who chose to workin a exploit or drive on a private road must accept the responsibility of theiractions to do so.     All airlines hold the responsibility of transporting their customersfrom a present of origin to a previously designated destination. The person whoagrees to buy a disc ount airline ticket, which warns to "fly at your own risk,"is entitled to receive the minimum expediency of transportation provided by theairline. The individual traveler should assume no other benefits other thantransportation. The airline company claims this act of transportation to be itsgoal of go rendered. Independent of difficulties which may arise incompleting this goal, the airline may not alter the basic duty which it iscontractually obligated to perform. The airline tacitly consented to performthis basic duty the moment they began transporting individuals for an acceptedpayment. Once an individual has boarded the airplane they render all controlover their safety to the accepting airline which holds the minimumresponsibility of returning the individual back to a state of safety once their