Insanity

In Torts class the other night, we discussed a case involving the issue of the intent of the insane. The issue was whether or not an insane person can form intent to cause harm. In the criminal realm, insanity is a scapegoat but that's not the case in Torts. Torts is cool because it doesn't matter if the crack pipe fried the brain of some tool. The tool(s) I speak of are still responsible. So if Grandpa Willie smoked three doobies and became insane, he's still liable for damages when he knocks you on the noggin with the butt of his rifle. If he could prove insanity in criminal law, he may walk away with 10 hours of community service. However, in Torts you go after his hard earned cash and are much more likely to win. The case we discussed was rather old and only referred to the Defendant as "insane." Nowadays, you're blessed with some special medical term that makes it sound less insane. It doesn't matter what kind of insanity a person possesses. In my book they're still a whack.