How to treat the death caused by high-rise parabolic objects and collective compensation for the whole building?

Whether it is fair or not depends on whether you are the owner or the victim.

Many people have never experienced the disaster of being hit by a high-altitude parabolic object, so when they see this problem, they will naturally substitute for the role of the homeowner and feel: I didn't do anything, why should I pay compensation? It's your business not to find the killer. Are you guilty just because I live in this building?

Of course, it is unfair that innocent homeowners are implicated. In reality, the probability of becoming a implicated owner is naturally greater than the probability of being hit, so many people disapprove of this law. Just as the killing of Didi passengers will attract the attention of the whole people, on the contrary, the killing of Didi drivers by passengers rarely causes waves. Because the probability of ordinary people becoming passengers is greater than the probability of becoming drip drivers, the fear and empathy of drivers being killed are not so great.

But what if you are the victim? Do you still feel unfair? When you were injured or even killed, there was no monitoring, no evidence, and no family could be found out. Are you willing to admit that you are unlucky? Do you want someone in your family to die and let it go?

Why does the court support it? I think there are the following reasons:

First, the tenants who don't throw things are really innocent, but the average amount of compensation allocated to each household is not much, so the impact on the tenants is not great. But if not, the victims will not get a penny, and the loss will be much greater than that of the residents. Compared with residents, the victim is more innocent, and the lesser of the two evils is taken. Moreover, among the compensated households, one is not innocent.

Second, it is said that the whole building is responsible. In fact, the residents themselves can prove it. For example, produce evidence to prove that there was no one at home at that time, so it was impossible to throw things. Or the window on our side has been sealed for a long time, so it can't be my home, so it can be exempted from compensation. After excluding some households, it is easier to narrow the scope of investigation, which may or may not be helpful to solve the case.

Third, it can encourage residents to tell the truth. Many times, even if residents know who it is, they will choose "more than one thing." After all, we are all neighbors, and testifying will affect neighborhood relations. But if we can't find the real murderer, we will face losses, and the neighborhood relationship before the interests will be nothing. People who know things will tell the truth. People who know that some clues are uncertain can't wait to say it, and then it will become a joint investigation of the whole building, which will also help improve the detection rate.

If I am a resident of the building, I also feel unfair. Why should I lose tens of thousands of dollars for no reason? It is not easy for me to make money. But if I were the victim, I would definitely think that all of you would suffer some losses. Pay for my loss first. People, their own interests first.

It is recommended to install cameras in all hotels.