I agree, that's why I said "might be solved".
Martin

>From: mira <mirah@...>
>Reply-To: thomasszaszdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
>To: thomasszaszdiscussion@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [ThomasSzaszDiscussion] Reason Magazine Article: Prozac
>Justice
>Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2005 16:54:10 +0200
>
>Martin Kessler wrote:
>
> > The dillema might be solved if we assume Pat had insurance for such a
> > treasure.
>
>But s/he'll lose the no-claim discount, and if s/he had another claim
>that year, s/he might be refused renewal, or have to pay a surcharge for
>reinsurance. Lee could have liability insurance, in which case the
>question would rise, whose insurance should pay? Insurance doesn't solve
>the responsibility problem.
>
>One of the most laughable, if not pathetic, misunderstandings of what
>responsibility is about, was by a driver of a bus full of passengers. He
>caused an accident while yacking away on his mobile phone. His defense?
>"Is it my fault the phone rang?"
>
>Mira
>