Ally Law and other Youtube stunts

orcestra May 25, 2019 at 08:14 4775 views 12 comments

Now, my question is: if someone subscribes to any of these stunt channels on youtube, are subscribers responsible for their illegal activities? Legally I have no idea. But ethically, maybe. In particular the most famous stunt/trespass person, a British guy called Ally Law, has said in his latest video and I quote:
"But if you want... illegal madnesses [then gives his site name]. "
In his case he is asking for actual money as a subscription to his own website. That to me ,makes the issue sharper. There must be some degree of moral responsibility that the paying person has for Ally Law's actions.
Do you agree?

Comments (12)

Deleted User May 25, 2019 at 14:11 #292256 0 likes

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Terrapin Station May 25, 2019 at 15:04 #292274 0 likes

Quoting orcestra

Now, my question is: if someone subscribes to any of these stunt channels on youtube, are subscribers responsible for their illegal activities? Legally I have no idea. But ethically, maybe.

No, of course not. No one is being forced to do stunts. It's their choice to do them.

Deleted User May 25, 2019 at 18:11 #292292 0 likes

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Terrapin Station May 25, 2019 at 18:41 #292294 0 likes

Reply to tim wood

The stunts being the illegal activities.

Deleted User May 25, 2019 at 19:38 #292295 0 likes

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Terrapin Station May 25, 2019 at 19:50 #292297 0 likes

Reply to tim wood

Correct. I have no complaint against you. The responsibility is with the person who chose to shoot me. My answer here should already be clear from what I wrote above.

Deleted User May 25, 2019 at 21:58 #292311 0 likes

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

Terrapin Station May 25, 2019 at 22:05 #292315 0 likes

Quoting tim wood

My own view cannot be a surprise. If B offers himself for hire for illegal purposes, and A engages him for those purposes, that at least is the crime of conspiracy. And if the crime is committed, then A might well find himself charged along with B. I think this is the way it is and the way it should be. But you appear to hold a different view. Have I misunderstood?

Right, my view is different than this. I'd have no crime of conspiracy if I were king.

Quoting tim wood

Inferred, now explicit. Would you say anyone else could have a complaint: Or no one?

I'm not sure what you're asking there. It seems basically you're asking if I agree that we should have conspiracy crimes. If so, see above.

Quoting tim wood

I suppose that, legal considerations aside, we ought to define "responsibility."

For what we've been talking about, what matters to me is whether someone is able (that is, whether they're physically able) to make a choice or not. If they are, they're responsible for the choices they make, and no one prior to that, with whatever influence on them, is responsible for the choice someone makes. As long as it's physically possible to make a different choice, only the person making the choice to perform action x is responsible for action x.

Deleted User May 25, 2019 at 22:15 #292317 0 likes

This user has been deleted and all their posts removed.

orcestra May 26, 2019 at 00:26 #292334 0 likes

Actually the example mentioned by some people here isn't that facetious or hypothetical. The video of "Russian Roulette stunt - Derren Brown". is still on youtube. He is a British mind control stunt guy. On BBC live TV he got a guy to put a bullet in a gun with 6 chambers. Derren shot himself with the chambers that he sensed had no bullet. Before hand he says to the guy "you are not morally or legally responsible if I ^&&^ this up". Now, I am not sure if I agree with Darren on that. Is that different from how Brandon Lee died when a gun was meant to be empty in a stunt but it was by mistake loaded?

Metaphysician Undercover May 26, 2019 at 00:58 #292339 0 likes

In many countries there is a legal principle known as "aiding and abetting", which holds those who assist in a crime as accountable.

Reply to Terrapin Station So the driver of the getaway car is not guilty of robbing the bank, even though the driver was going to get a share of the loot?

Terrapin Station May 26, 2019 at 11:54 #292410 0 likes

Quoting Metaphysician Undercover

So the driver of the getaway car is not guilty of robbing the bank, even though the driver was going to get a share of the loot?

Right.