Right to idiocy?

This is something I've always wondered about, not the issue I've just given up on that, but how others view this.

In the U.S. over the last several decades we've gradually begun moving more and more to giving people a right to be stupid. If a guy puts up barb wire on his fence, puts up a sign saying no trespassing, and makes his desires known to the neighborhood, then in spite of all this a dog or child gets trapped in it, the man who put up the barbed wire can be charged and arrested for attempted murder and criminal negligence. If an old man, living in his own house is too sick or disabled to do more then manage his law and the city plants a tree on his property that later grows out and cracks the sidewalk and someone trips over this crack and injures themselves because of it, they have a right to sue the old man because he is considered legally responsible for upkeep of that sidewalk, despite having no word in the city's planting of the tree. If a guy gets drunk and tries to have sex with a lawn-mower and therefore gets his dick cut off he has a legal right to sue the company because the warning label didn't SPECIFICALLY say he couldn't have sex with it.

The first and second examples above are true, the last is an exaggeration, but still technically possible. So my question to you is this: Do we have a RIGHT, a Constitutional Right, to be stupid? Does our stupidity or carelessness give us the right to trample on other people's rights and livelihood? And if we do have this "right" how far does it extend? To just pets and minor? To anyone who is "impaired"? Or does it apply to everyone?

Interesting, not going to vote, because I am stuck between 3 and 4.

There is no, and there will never be, a perfect system Aard. However, i know of this history of ridiculous law suits that occur in america. These...do not happen here. Suffice to say, every single judge in this country, or for the rest of Europe and most of the world, would laugh at you and sue YOU for wasting the court's time. We give a some what....wisdom lenience to lawsuits. What i find funny is that cases in america use juris, 11 people or sth, sitting there, hearing the case, and those 11 people decide these in favor of the stupid? I dunno, maybe those cases are by judge decision, wich makes me....lol. People in the world, and particularly, in America, have to start opening their eyes and realize humanity is flawed. And by such, our laws and government is flawed. When we see these flaws in action, it is of common sense and wisdom that we must judge things USING common sense and wisdom. There are those stupid laws in America, like the you are forbidden to have a donkey in your tub in New York.

As Dray said no system is perfect but with America, it has been more of a culture shift. As soon after Vietnam, the culture went from one of sensibility to a sue happy culture. It is also sadly allowed due to the wide corruption of values, with liberalism stupidity in the mix, it really doesn't help. Conservatives may be a pain in the ass for some but liberalism(not bashing all of it) has introduced a right to be anything and that includes being stupid to extremely stupid. Also when has logic ever stopped us Americans

As long as there are humans, there will be stupidity. Democracy has some particularly retarded examples of "Politically Correct, Realistically Retarded" laws and viewpoints. The system is run by several people with a wide variety of stupidity and ignorance, therefore it becomes a very flawed system. A stupid rule is put in place because nobody cares or nobody even realizes how stupid it is.

However, in my opinion, the blame does not rest solely on the "government". The problem lies with the equally(if not more so) flawed justice system. Yes I understand that law and government are basically yin and yang, but they are run by two separate systems.

For example, the government is sluggish in removing a law that forbids having donkeys in a tub because it was pretty much forgotten and nobody enforces it. Then one day a stupid cop with no intelligence charges a man for doing this. It goes all the way to court, and that is were it gets fudged up. The judge who reviews this case and any others responsible for deciding the outcome should look at this case and dismiss it for its utter stupidity. THEY ARE THE ONES WHO SHOULD BE CALLED TO ACCOUNT FOR WHAT THEY DECIDE. Yes the government was stupid for passing that law, but the court is far more responsible for what happens when it comes time to decide on that law. The judge who lets a murderer get off scot free because the police didn't seize the evidence with the right paperwork is a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Because of the way humans have allowed the court system to function, this type of ignorance and outright illogical reasoning and stupidity of this magnitude happens all the time. For me, the question isn't "Do we have a constitutional right to be stupid", its: "Do those in high authority have a constitutional right to be stupid?"

No one has the right to be stupid, they should be held fully accountable for their actions. There are however, special situations in which a person could be excused for stupidity. People are manipulated and influenced by the world around them. Some people have stupid parents that raise their children in a totally screwed up way. Sometimes a person's foolish actions are influenced largely by what they have experienced in their life. Although we are all accountable for our actions, sometimes other people are also accountable if they cause a person to act stupid. Hence why I voted 4 instead of 5.

Thats called ignorance, not stupidity.

Well i look at laws like that in context. If you research the law why was it passed in the first place? I agree that at some point it should have been repealed in favor of common sense... well any way. i cannot think of a reason for someone NOT to be held accountable for their actions in one way or another. Parents teach their kids but cannot serve time for them and if a person is mentally challenged and are dangerous, they should be under the care of someone that can take care of them or institutionalized.