You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
0

[–] SerialLarper ago 

The common law right to use a public road has an associated duty of care. The same principle can be applied public liberty when there's a risk of spreading disease. Carelessness in this context would involve disregard of precautions, like reducing contact with others if it's reasonable to believe that such contact could spread the disease.

But when there's a dispute about what's reasonable, where is the competent authority who can balance the rights against the risks without prejudice? The civil state isn't competent, since it doesn't recognise the natural right of liberty when it deals with persons. Commercial law has a solution involving affidavits, but for it to work at scale there would probably have to be a protocol which could adapt to changing circumstances like the level of harm.