当前位置: X-MOL 学术Criminal Law and Philosophy › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Defensive Liability: A Matter of Rights Enforcement, not Distributive Justice
Criminal Law and Philosophy Pub Date : 2021-07-30 , DOI: 10.1007/s11572-021-09591-8
Susanne Burri 1
Affiliation  

The Moral Responsibility Account of Liability to Defensive Harm (MRA) states that an agent becomes liable to defensive harm if, and only if, she engages in a foreseeably risk-imposing activity that subsequently threatens objectively unjustified harm. Advocates of the account contend that liability to defensive harm is best understood as an aspect of distributive justice. Individuals who are liable to some harm are not wronged if the harm is imposed on them, and liability to defensive harm thus helps ensure that harm is borne by whoever has least of an objection of justice against being burdened with it—or so advocates of the MRA insist. In this paper, I argue that liability to defensive harm is not grounded in considerations of distributive justice. While it depends on the wider societal context what allocation of a burden is distributively most just, liability to defensive harm is a distinctly localised affair. I propose that liability to defensive harm is best understood as part of the enforcement dimension of our rights to non-interference. Framing liability in this way does not invalidate the MRA. It does, however, render subjective impermissibility accounts of liability particularly promising.



中文翻译:

防御性责任:权利执行问题,而不是分配正义问题

防御性伤害责任的道德责任说明 (MRA) 指出,当且仅当代理人从事可预见的高风险活动,随后威胁客观上不合理的伤害时,她才可能遭受防御性伤害。该帐户的拥护者争辩说,最好将防御性伤害的责任理解为分配正义的一个方面。如果伤害是强加给他们的,那么有责任遭受某种伤害的个人不会被冤枉,因此防御性伤害的责任有助于确保伤害由对正义的反对最少的人承担 - 或者是正义的倡导者MRA 坚持。在本文中,我认为防御性伤害的责任不是基于分配正义的考虑。虽然这取决于更广泛的社会背景,什么样的负担分配在分配上是最公正的,但防御性伤害的责任是一个明显局部化的事情。我建议最好将防御性伤害的责任理解为我们不干涉权的执行层面的一部分。以这种方式界定责任不会使 MRA 无效。然而,它确实使责任的主观不允许性说明特别有希望。

更新日期:2021-07-30
down
wechat
bug