Abstract
An inquiry into the relation between tort law and criminal behavior reveals an inconsistency that requires redress. Negligence doctrine expressly recognizes that the threat of criminal and tort liability does not induce perfect compliance with the law, whereas the rule of strict liability for abnormally dangerous activities assumes everyone acts lawfully. For reasons illustrated by the tort cases involving the manufacture and distribution of handguns, courts should eliminate the inconsistency by applying the rule of strict liability in a manner that accounts for unlawful behavior. This approach is faithful to the rule of strict liability in the Restatement (Second) of Torts, and would let courts directly address the normative issue posed by the application of strict liability to the manufacture and distribution of handguns.
How to Cite
43 Ariz. L. Rev. 311 (2001)
9
Views
2
Downloads