Killing by Autonomous Vehicles and the Legal Doctrine of Necessity
Tóm tắt
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Alexander L, Moore MS (2015) Deontological Ethics. In: The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2015 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2015/entries/ethics-deontological/
Asaro P (2011) A body to kick, but still no soul to damn: legal perspectives on robotics. In: Lin P, Abney K, Bekey GA (eds) Robot ethics: the ethical and social implications of robotics. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 169–186
Austin JL (1956) A Plea for excuses. In: J.L. Austin (1961) Philosophical papers, edited by J.O. Urmson and G.J. Warnock. Oxford, Oxford University Press
Bonnefon JF, Shariff A, Rahwan I (2016) The social dilemma of autonomous vehicles. Science 352(6293):1573–1576. doi: 10.1126/science.aaf2654
Christie GC (1999) The defense of necessity considered from the legal and moral points of view. Duke Law J 48(5):975–1042
Cohan J (2006) Homicide by necessity. Chapman Law Review 10(1):119–185
Dennis IH (2009) On necessity as a defence to crime: possibilities, problems and the limits of justification and excuse. Crim Law Philos 3(1):29–49
Eagle v Chambers (2004) rtr 9
Fletcher GP (2000) Rethinking criminal law. Oxford University Press, New York
Foot P (1967) The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. Oxford Review 5:5–15
Gerdes JC, Thornton SM (2015) Implementable ethics for autonomous vehicles. In: Maurer M, Gerdes JC, Lenz B, Winner H (eds) Autonomes Fahren. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 87–102. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-662-45854-9_5
Hart HLA (1961) The concept of law. Clarendon, Oxford
Latta v. New Orleans & N.W. Ry (1912) 59 So. 250
Lin P (2015) Why ethics matters for autonomous cars. In: Maurer M, Gerdes JC, Lenz B, Winner H (eds) Autonomes Fahren. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, pp 69–85. http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-662-45854-9_4
Matthias A (2004) The responsibility gap: ascribing responsibility for the actions of learning automata. Ethics Inf Technol 6(3):175–183. doi: 10.1007/s10676-004-3422-1
McSherry B (2002) The doctrine of necessity and medical treatment. J Law Med 10(1):10–16
Model Penal Code (1958). Tentative Draft No 8
Moore MS (1997) Placing blame: a general theory of the criminal law. Clarendon Press, Oxford
Moore MS (2010) Act and crime: the philosophy of action and its implications for criminal law. Oxford University Press, New York
Nyholm S, Smids J (2016) The ethics of accident-algorithms for self-driving cars: an applied trolley problem? Ethical Theory Moral Pract 19(5):1275–1289. doi: 10.1007/s10677-016-9745-2
Quinn W (1989) Actions, intentions, and consequences: the doctrine of double effect. Philos Public Aff 18(4):334–351
R v Dudley and Stephens (1884) 14 QBD 273 DC
R v Longbottom (1849) 3 Cox 439
R v Swindall and Osborne (1846) 2 Car & Kir 230
Re A (conjoined twins) (2001) 2 WLR 480
Robinson PH (1975) A theory of justification: societal harm as a prerequisite for criminal liability. 23 UCLA L. Rev 23:266–292
Ruiz v Forman (1974) 514 S.W.2d 817
SAE Information Report (J3016) (n.d.) Taxonomy and definitions for terms related to on-road motor vehicle automated driving systems
Santoni de Sio F (2016) Ethics and self-driving cars: a white paper on responsible innovation in automated driving systems. Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment Rijkswaterstaat
Smith JC (1989) Justification and excuse in the criminal law, Sweet & Maxwell, London
Smith, BW (2015) Regulation and the Risk of Inaction In: Maurer M, Gerdes JC, Lenz B, Winner H (eds) Autonomes Fahren, Springer, Berlin pp 593–609 http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-3-662-45854-9_27#page-1
State v. Scribner (2002) 72 Conn. App 736
Taurek JM (1977) Should the numbers count? Philos Public Aff 6(4):293–316
Thomson JJ (1986) Rights, restitution and risk: Essays in moral theory, Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Thomson JJ (1990) The realm of rights. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
United States v. Holmes (1842) 26 F. Cas. 360 (C.C.E.D. Pa. 1842)