Should a person who knowingly infects someone with aids be treated like a murderer?
even though people no they should practice safe sex, if a person knowingly has sex with someone without telling them they have aids ,should they be treated just like a person who kills with a gun or a knife?
This story does not directly answer your question. But, several years ago, a prisoner at the Atmore Correctional Facility in Alabama was taken to a state hospital for treatment of aids. After he gave blood, they put a bandage on the area where blood was taken. He bled quite a bit and the bandage was covered with his blood. The handcuffed prisoner managed to take the bandage off and shove it in the mouth of a correctional officer. The prisoner was charged with attempted murder (2nd degree I think). I don't recall the outcome of the trial or if there was a trial. So, I would say yes, a person with aids who knowingly infects another should be charged.
I do not know if they would be treated as a murderer, but they most certainly can have legal action taken against them. And, if the lawyers of the plaintiff are good enough, the can get a satisfactory prison sentence I do believe.
The person should be suable in court for a charge that's almost as severe as murder, but not quite. It almost is killing, but not quite. It should be punishable, however.
Yes, I believe they should at least be considered an attempted murderer. If the person contracts AIDS, then the punishment should be worse.
I believe they are. If I'm not mistaken, they get thrown in jail for it. By law, if you have aids or any kind of STD and you don't tell the person you sleep with you have it, they can take you to court. Not quite sure if they get treated as a murderer though. If people weren't so openly having sex with tons of people, we wouldn't have to worry about this kinda stuff!
A person who is knowingly infected with Aids or HIV should be responsible for their actions. Even those who hold black belts in Karate must warn anyone who becomes aggressive with them. If we had a terrorist who knowingly released a deadly virus on our nation, we would certainly hold that person guilt of some significant crime. Whether or not the crime reaches the level of murder becomes a function of whether or not anyone dies. There is also the consideration of premeditation in that if you know that you are infected then you must make a conscious decision to infect someone else...i.e. no protection. WB
I would think it would be more like assault with a deadly 'weapon'; the person won't necessarily contract HIV, and not everyone who does dies, so it may not end in a death.
Not if AIDS doesn't kill them. It's outcome that separates assault from murder under law; and it's worth remembering that AIDS is no longer tantamount to a death sentence.
I'm going to have say to some degree...... 2nd or 3rd degree murder.
personally i believe if the person is convicted and someone they had sex with dies, first degree murder is what the charge should be.
A person knowing they have aids and yet has sex with another person without telling them; in my opinion that person is a deadly if not terminal weapon. The intent is there; that in my opinion is enough... to put anyone in danger of their life, knowingly is completely wrong; my answer is yes!
Yes because they knew what they were doing and didn't care about someone else.
Reading all the answers given - I have one question to ask, does the idiot who has sex with the person with HIV not have any responsibility?
Everyone out there having sex today has a responsibility to protect themselves AS IF the person they are sleeping with IS infected with something.
That being said, no, perhaps assault....and many states already do have laws in effect for this.
My personal belief is that people who know they have an STD have a responsibility to tell their partner, however the partner has a responsibility to themselves, as well.
Any time someone puts a life in jeopardy it should be construed as malicious and and should be construed as public endangerment. It's no different than driving a car, If you are irresponsible you should be held responsible and acountable.
Having any kind of STD should be handled with responsibility. It does make sense though to feel victimized by someone who has HIV without even bothering to tell you they do have it and have sex with you anyway. But I think it's also kind of difficult to tell someone without being rejected.
Anyway, it's still unfair to treat them as "murderers" because a lot of people today live with AIDS and they're doing just fine. I think it's a matter of accepting it (or not) and dealing with it optimistically especially if you're the one who contracted the virus through someone who didn't even tell you. And if you feel apprehensive about it, i guess there are laws for that, although of course, it wouldn't reverse the fact that you already have the virus.
Yes absolutely. Its a travesty when these types of actions occur and there should be very severe penalties for these types of people that have very deadly diseases and continue to take actions that put others in danger of catching the disease.
Nushawn Willams of Jamestown NY. was sentenced to rape and 2 counts of reckless endangerment for knowingly infecting 2 girls with the HIV virus. He is now in civil confinement and fighting to get out, they will not let him out. He is still danger of spreading HIV. http://www.wgrz.com/news/local/story.as … p;catid=37
In cases where a crime has been committed involving HIV, then I would say absolutely. If someone is raping people, intentionally spreading their disease than I would say that they are a threat to the public and should suffer harsh penalty.
If there is sex between two consenting adults, then the person that does not have HIV is not taking the necessary steps to protect themselves. Murder is too harsh for this scenario, although failure to inform should have some legal consequences up to and including jail time. If someone went around spreading a disease using a sringe or powder substance, they would be labeled a dangerous terrorist. This is not much different in my eyes.
the person should be charged with assault since the act itself does not necessarily result in death, given the recent treatments developed for aids.
I agree that it would not be actual murder, and perhaps it might be attempted murder. However, proving this would be extremely problematic, since intentionality is a critical part of this. Someone could recklessly infect another as well. I think there should be some punitive measure for criminal transmission of HIV/AIDS, but it'd stop well short of murder.
A person who knowingly infects someone else is, and should be, criminally charged. Attempted murder and assault are more descriptive of the potential act than a murder charge.
If someone knowingly did that, they should definitely be persecuted in some way. I think they should be treated as an attempted murderer. But I'm guessing proving that could be very difficult. I'm not sure that any doctor would release that type of patient information.
I just erased my knee jerk reaction answer.
First and foremost we all have a rsponsibility to protect ourselves. Having unprotected sex is not very responsible. Add to that having casual sex with a stranger or person you don't know well is a recipe for disaster.
The HIV positive individual should be charged with something, assult with a deadly weapon or attempted mureder?
However, I am wishy washy and sex requires no full disclosure so the responsibility falls back on each of us to protect ourselves.
aids murders the murderers..................................................!
Yes, without a doubt they should be brought to justice.
There is absolutely a moral obligation to disclose such information ahead of time. I think that in some states it is considered illegal to purposely hide such facts, and possibly infect a partner. BUT the problem isn't as "simple" as this for many reasons such as: people who have multiple partners, the idea of how to prove the intention of the infected person. Again, not simple. This is why it is so important to be armed with as much information as possible beforehand, and rule out any possible consequences of certain situations.
I think they should be punished if they knew and I think its its actully a criminal offense
If someone knows they are infected with AIDS and, even with protection, sleeps with anyone without telling them their status then yes, they should be charged with attempted murder at least, if not full on murder. AIDS doesn't have a cure, and changes the life of infected people. I agree that people shouldn't sleep around anyways, and should always use protection...but protection doesn't always protect...and people keep sleeping around.
They should lose their freedom for a certain period of time under attempted murder or great bodily harm charges.
Nothing is more heartbreaking than for an innocent third or fourth party to get infected because of a reckless person who has an incurable and deadly disease!
AS very much, as I would like to take the easy way out and say YES,,,,,,,,,,,
let us, as a society and a humanity REALLY think about this.
Really, let us think..........
If John has a deadly disease..............and Sue is a passionate and willing partner..........is it John's responsiblity?
In a world of date rape drugs, you can not use her past encounters or experiences against her, ( NOT saying that this is wrong)
The responsible sexual world has become a complex legal battlefield.
From a medical outlook......there IS hope................aids is no longer an automatic death sentenace.......the prospects are encouraging
We are not talking "ethics" in this question, we are talking " legalities"........
Doesn't the willing partner share some risk?
What IF the person did not know they had aids, herpes, or another sexual transtmitted disease..................
Is it the FAULT or the persuor, or the fault of the succummed.?
WHY must it be the FAULT of anyone?
Why can't it be a matter of the cards dealt? Play the game........win or lose.
TODAY............there is no one under the 3rd grade of elementary school who is not aware of
aids, VD, gay people...........
There is NO excuse, today , in our internet, open disussion world, for not being aware.......
I can walk into any public women's restroom and buy a choice and varitey of condoms...........and leave there in search of a tampon!
OUR society is SEX and INTERCOURSE orientend, not menustraition, not constipated, not miscarriage ( but abortion)
IF............you really want to be a progressive and enlightened society.................STOP blaming other people.
If your pro-choice, sexual lives would be a f antastic place to show your dedication, your committment, your responsiblity,come and speak now, this is your invitation,
I have NEVER been one to blame my pain on others................It is a cheaters way.
Come on, speak as you will..............there will be no voices from my past.
Assuming the person dies, absolutely. There's no guarantee they WILL die, since there are now treatments for HIV that can stave off death. However, charges of assault in some form would be perfectly proper, with conditions for an upgrade in the charge, if that person should ever pass.
If they KNOWINGLY infect someone with HIV/AIDS, I believe they are and should be considered to have assaulted or attempted murder via biological means, or illness. I may be wrong and each state probably has its own statute concerning the issue, but any way you look at it, the infected person has attempted to ruin a life without having the right to do so. Yes, they should be convicted of a crime, and yes, they should be thrown in jail for it.
This is simple.
If a person knowingly infects another person with Anthrax - should *they* be treated like a murderer? Clearly they would.
AIDS is no different. If you are intentionally infecting people, then you are using it as a weapon. Not only are you infecting them, but if they don't find out soon enough - they could infect more people...and the cycle continues.
You could call this a form of biological terrorism.
The AIDS virus needs to be eradicated. Aside from coming up with a 100% effective vaccine, the only way to do so is to eliminate the spread. Knowingly spreading it is counterproductive to these efforts.
So...should a person who knowingly infects someone with AIDS be treated like a person who shoots another person in the head? No. They should be treated worse.
Sex is as much as a responsibility as it is an enjoyable pleasure so before being intimate with anyone, you have to really know yourself as well as the other person. That being said, if you betray someone's honesty and trust enough to violate them and take away an important and viable part of their life, it is just as bad if not worse than holding a gun to their head. I say worse because it least those who kill with a gun or knife are at least humane enough (in some sick way) to let the person not suffer as long. AIDS is a slow, haunting death that I don't wish on anyone.
I would say yes, it is a way of killing someone slowly and more painfully!
They could only be treated as a murderer if the other person died through contracting Aids. For a death to be considered murder, there normally needs to be an element of intent. For this argument to be successful, the killer generally needs to demonstrate that the death could not have been anticipated or was unavoidable, if someone sleeps with another while knowingly having Aids then they took no precautions and it could have certainly been unavoidable. While i agree that people should practice safe sex anyway, it is still wrong for someone to sleep with a partner knowing they already have the virus and deliberately keeping it from them for their own gain.
Yes ofcourse, HE/SHE must be careful and give some honesty to his/her soul, not to anyone else. To respect the humanity is the first lesson we learn from our elders and if we will take care of others definitely our LORD will take much more care of us. As someone has said these beautiful words;
Do good and have good.
and my answer is yes he/she is a murderer.
I think such a person should be treated like a criminal. If the person that was infected dies then the AIDS?HIV person should also die according to civil law. At the same time, I believe no one who is sexually active should leave the safety of their lives in the hands of anyone - no matter how much you trust that person. There are ways to be intimate with a person with aids but the risk is on the un-infected person to proceed with their decision to have sex with a person known to have AIDS.
I think there should be some strong repercussions for it that does include criminal charges. There is no reason something like this cannot go to court. A person who kills with a gun or knife is slightly different...and maybe it's more callous and malicious with bodily fluids. But the answer is this is definitely a felony.
I work with patients who have been diagnosed with different infectious illnesses for a living. AIDS is not the only chronic illness that can spread sexually. Someone could knowingly have Syphillis, HTLV I/II or chronic Hepatitis C, to name a few, and those could be passed sexually...so would there be laws against those too?
For people living in the United States, contracting HIV is not the death sentence like it was in the 80s. Biotech companies like mine have worked hard to make pharmaceutical treatments that can prolong a relatively normal and happy life for decades. HIV is considered to be a chronic condition, just like chronic Hep C or HTLV.
I'm not saying that a person should get away scott-free for purposefully passing HIV along to someone, but your question asks if that person should be treated the same as a murderer who kills someone with a gun or a knife. Sexual intercourse is a two-party activity. There's someone else providing consent (if there's no consent, then that's obviously already a crime). If you shoot someone in the head, it's not like your victim even had a choice or a chance to save himself. So is it really right to "treat someone who infects another with AIDS the same as a murderer" - No it is not.
If any person infected with AIDS and that person know this should be responsible for their actions... So, i would say yes that person should be charged..
I'm not sure about 'murderer' but I do think they should go to prison if they knowingly and intentionally infect someone.
maybe attempted murder, but after all it's better to be safe than sorry.
Yes. If a person suffering from AIDS intentionally tries to infect others, he or she should surely be treated like a murderer......
Assault with intent to harm. That a person would purposly do such harm, either out of malice or out of selfish desire, should not go unpunished.
They should not be charged with murder. You cannot infect some one with aids, you can only expose them to HIV. Not everyone exposed to the virus gets HIV or AIDs. Should there be some sort of charge? Yes. But proving they knew and had unprotected sex knowingly would be very difficult.
If they knowingly do so they should be held legally accountable. I'm not sure what the punishment should be but I do believe it should be harsh.
yes, cuz they know they could end up causing another person to die.
by Josak 6 years ago
A few years back I met a man who had been a child soldier in the Sierra Leone conflict, in one of the most harrowing conversations I have ever had over a whole evening he told me about the things he had seen and done, some of which are literally too heinous to write here, from murder to cannibalism...
by M. T. Dremer 5 years ago
Would you hire someone without a degree in Graphic Design?I have years of experience with graphic design software, but I don't have any sort of degree in graphic design (my degree is in creative writing). I've been applying to some jobs recently without much luck and I was wondering how much the...
by Shil1978 7 years ago
What would you say are the pros and cons of plastic surgery for someone without cosmetic defects?
by Himeko Sanbika 8 months ago
Is it possible to love someone without any reason at all?if Yes/No, Why?
by kathleenkat 5 years ago
Abortion rights have always interested me. There are many reasons why people have them. I have heard that, in other countries, people will have an abortion as soon as they find the sex of the baby to be female. Do we have abortions for such reasons of vanity, here in the US? How much freedom should...
by Holle Abee 6 years ago
I was having an email debate with a U.S. Representative last night via emails back and forth. She's behind the opposition to a bipartisan bill that would ban shipping U.S. horses to Mexico and Canada to be butchered for food. I told her I didn't agree with eating companion animals/pets like...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|