Mohammad Reza Barzegar; Gholam Hussein Elham
Abstract
The advancement of technology has led to the production of a car that does not require a human driver. In June 2016, the first self-driving car was successfully tested in Iran and in the same month their use was banned by traffic police chief due to lack of relevant laws and lack of clear liability for ...
Read More
The advancement of technology has led to the production of a car that does not require a human driver. In June 2016, the first self-driving car was successfully tested in Iran and in the same month their use was banned by traffic police chief due to lack of relevant laws and lack of clear liability for possible accidents. The present study seeks to investigate how, with current criminal laws, it is possible to resolve issues arising from injuries caused by self-driving car. In this paper, regardless of other factors, only the criminal liability of the car user has been addressed. The present paper proceeds with a descriptive-analytical approach and adapts the existing rules on the self-driving car. Examining the aspects of this issue, the current study concluded that basis for imposing liability on a user at zero, one and two levels is similar to that of ordinary cars, since ultimately the user is liable for any result generated from the combination of user's driving and driver assistance systems. The basis of liability at level three is user's omission. The self-driving car at level four is a combination of level three and five of self-driving cars and regarding the user's
Gholam Hussein Elham; Rasul Abed
Volume 2, Issue 7 , July 2014, , Pages 73-102
Abstract
This paper tries to examine the foundations of right to bear arms in USAlegal system. This right is the most ancient right which has been a subject forphilosophical arguments of Aristotle and Plato. Some believe that the rightto bear arms is a fundamental and constitutional right of the citizens, but ...
Read More
This paper tries to examine the foundations of right to bear arms in USAlegal system. This right is the most ancient right which has been a subject forphilosophical arguments of Aristotle and Plato. Some believe that the rightto bear arms is a fundamental and constitutional right of the citizens, but theopponents argue that it is inimical to an oligarchic regime. According to thefirst view, the criminal law supports the holders to bear arm and punisheseveryone who violates this right. However, according the second, bearingarms by violation of the law has been criminalized and offenders should beconvicted. Among these approaches, the common law system was affected bythe proponent of right to bear arms, therefore, this right has been recognizedfor the people. Under this circumstance, the founders of United StatesConstitution allocated the second amendment to this right. Yet, theConstitution of Iran did not have any article about right to bear arm so thatthe legislator could be able how to regulate this part. The first chapter ofthis paper examines the primary philosophical arguments on right to beararms and the second chapter is about the rules of common law regardingthis right. Finally, the third chapter examines the effect of philosophicalapproaches and common law rules on the evolution of right to bear arms inthe United State legal system and the different criminal policy of Iran.
