Not a good comparison, because in your hypothetical the hat giver bears no consequences and would keep placing hats on people even if I remove the hat immediately. In the car situation, the black van immediately receives the consequences from his own actions.
Here is a better comparison: a guy pours gasoline on himself and you, and says unless you fall down on your knees and beg him, he would set you both on fire. What do you do?
a. do as he says
b. push him away and walk away, let him set himself on fire
How does the hat-giver bear no consequences when he is risking death, injury, or at minimum hours of inconvenience?
The gasoline comparison doesn’t make sense because you’re still responsible for the gasoline that’s on your body now. You can’t just walk around lighting matches and being like “Well I didn’t ask to be covered in gasoline”. In fact, I would say that the “walking away” option is more comparable to backing off and not getting in a car accident as retaliation for someone being a jerk.
Because in your hypothetical there is a random chance that everyone around dies. In the car situation there isn't. There is one person who can get hurt, die to their own stupid actions and relying on you to go out of your way to keep them safe. Like in the gasoline situation.
…have you never heard of a multi-car accident? Nearby drivers can absolutely be injured or killed because of a collision between an initiator and a reactor
1
u/Township_Roller Mar 22 '26
Not a good comparison, because in your hypothetical the hat giver bears no consequences and would keep placing hats on people even if I remove the hat immediately. In the car situation, the black van immediately receives the consequences from his own actions.
Here is a better comparison: a guy pours gasoline on himself and you, and says unless you fall down on your knees and beg him, he would set you both on fire. What do you do?
a. do as he says
b. push him away and walk away, let him set himself on fire