• ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I provided a link showing that this risk, real or perceived is prevalent.

    But you didn’t read that, did you?

    I also didn’t make the case that I knew the numbers on the risk, in fact I made the case that neither of us know. So the burden of proof is on the person making the claim of knowing the risk. That’s not me.

    But you’re not gonna listen to that either.

    😉 have a nice day.

    • jimbo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I provided a link showing that this risk, real or perceived is prevalent.

      Suddenly trying to substitute “perceived risk” for “real risk” is a rather weaselly way to make an argument about real risk.

      But you didn’t read that, did you?

      Yes, and it was an odd article for you to link to since it didn’t at all support your claim about there being real risk. Perceptions do not always align with reality, and you know that.

      I also didn’t make the case that I knew the numbers on the risk, in fact I made the case that neither of us know. So the burden of proof is on the person making the claim of knowing the risk. That’s not me.

      You’ve been making the claim in almost every comment that there’s a real risk of someone being accused of a sex crime while performing CPR. You’ve provided no evidence for that risk. You’ve admitted that you have no evidence of that risk. Yet you still keep claiming it’s a real risk. You don’t just get to say, “Well neither of us know for sure therefore you must accept my claim”. That’s ridiculous.

      Have a nice day.

      • ArbiterXero@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        If neither of us have proof either way, it’s a stalemate. That doesn’t make me wrong, but it doesn’t make me right.

        Given that if a bra has underwire, I may have to remove it for a defibrillator, you can’t perceive a possible misunderstanding?

        The risk isn’t necessarily legal, but social so. A court case isn’t required for it to be real.

        Kim wright is a case where the man was sued. You don’t see many cases because they’re laughed out of court, but that doesn’t mean there isn’t damage done.

        I have 2 REAL questions for you.

        1. If there’s zero risk to being accused of harm when you’re trying to help, why do Good Samaritan laws exist? What was the need?

        2. Can you perceive a possible misinterpretation when I have to remove an unconscious woman’s garments including bra for a defibrillator?