New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions
Mail Us support@pass4success.com
Location US
Mob_nav_barsMENU

ASIS PSP Exam - Topic 6 Question 93 Discussion

Actual exam question for ASIS's PSP exam
Question #: 93
Topic #: 6
[All PSP Questions]

What occurs when the person who committed the act was able to foresee that the action would result in certain damages?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: D

by Brandon at Jul 16, 2024, 06:11 AM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium PSP Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Submit Cancel
Shalon
3 months ago
I doubt it's just about control; there's more to it.
upvoted 0 times
...
Naomi
3 months ago
I think "Active resister" fits best here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Angelyn
3 months ago
Wait, is "International tort" really a thing?
upvoted 0 times
...
Norah
4 months ago
Definitely not "None of the above."
upvoted 0 times
...
Glory
4 months ago
It's called foreseeability in law.
upvoted 0 times
...
Nelida
4 months ago
I feel like the answer could be C, but I also remember something about negligence and foreseeability that might apply here too.
upvoted 0 times
...
Edna
4 months ago
I'm a bit lost on this one. Does "international tort" mean something specific, or is it just a typo for "intentional tort"?
upvoted 0 times
...
Flo
4 months ago
I remember a practice question about foreseeability in torts, and I think it was linked to how damages are assessed.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lang
5 months ago
I think this might relate to intentional torts, but I'm not entirely sure if that's the right term here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ardella
5 months ago
I'm confident I know the answer to this. The key is understanding the concept of foreseeability and how it relates to liability.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ryann
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about this one. I'll need to review my notes on foreseeability and damages to determine the best approach.
upvoted 0 times
...
Trina
5 months ago
This question seems straightforward, but I want to make sure I understand the key concepts before answering.
upvoted 0 times
...
Anthony
5 months ago
Okay, I think I've got this. If the person committing the act could foresee the resulting damages, that would likely point to a finding of liability. Let me double-check the options.
upvoted 0 times
...
Charisse
5 months ago
The Safeguards Rule under GLBA sounds like the right answer to me. It requires companies to protect the security and confidentiality of consumer information, which seems to be the main issue Noah is concerned about.
upvoted 0 times
...
Willetta
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a bit unsure about some of these options. I'll need to carefully read through each one and think about how they apply to crosscutting concepts.
upvoted 0 times
...
Denise
9 months ago
Wait, is the answer 'all of the above'? Kidding, kidding, but seriously, this question is making my head spin. Time for a coffee break!
upvoted 0 times
Shawnee
7 months ago
Let's go grab that coffee break now!
upvoted 0 times
...
Katheryn
7 months ago
Definitely, foreseeing certain damages sounds like it could be an international tort.
upvoted 0 times
...
Carolynn
7 months ago
I agree, it seems like the most relevant option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Daniel
8 months ago
I think the answer is C) International tort.
upvoted 0 times
...
Gary
8 months ago
D) None of the above
upvoted 0 times
...
Maile
8 months ago
C) International tort
upvoted 0 times
...
Vanna
8 months ago
B) Lack of control
upvoted 0 times
...
Lenna
9 months ago
A) Active resister
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Natalie
10 months ago
Lack of control? Really? If they could foresee the damages, that sounds like the opposite of lack of control. I'm with Eloisa on this one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Angelica
10 months ago
Hmm, international tort? What, did they commit this crime across borders or something? Sounds like a wild option, I'll pass on that one.
upvoted 0 times
Camellia
8 months ago
Definitely, let's stick with lack of control.
upvoted 0 times
...
Krissy
8 months ago
I agree, lack of control seems like a more straightforward option.
upvoted 0 times
...
Una
8 months ago
Yeah, international tort does sound complicated. I think I'll go with lack of control.
upvoted 0 times
...
Cora
8 months ago
D) None of the above
upvoted 0 times
...
Ernie
8 months ago
C) International tort
upvoted 0 times
...
Peter
8 months ago
B) Lack of control
upvoted 0 times
...
Barney
9 months ago
A) Active resister
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Kenia
10 months ago
I'm gonna go with D. None of these options seem to fit the description. It's like a trick question or something.
upvoted 0 times
...
Eloisa
10 months ago
A? I mean, if they could foresee the damages, that sounds like an active decision to me. Gotta be A.
upvoted 0 times
Erasmo
9 months ago
Definitely A, it makes sense that they would be considered an active resister in that case.
upvoted 0 times
...
Veta
9 months ago
Yeah, it seems like they had control over the situation if they could foresee the damages.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ryan
9 months ago
I think it's A too. They actively chose to do something that they knew would cause harm.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Luther
10 months ago
That makes sense, I see your point. Thanks for explaining.
upvoted 0 times
...
Noelia
10 months ago
I disagree, I believe it's C) International tort because it involves foreseeability of damages.
upvoted 0 times
...
Luther
11 months ago
I think the answer is A) Active resister.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel