What does it mean when a person uses a tactic of assumption of risk in a negligence case?

When a person uses the tactic of assumption of risk in a negligence case, they are asserting that they were aware of the potential risks involved in a certain activity and voluntarily accepted those risks. This legal doctrine applies particularly in situations where an individual has knowledge of the dangers associated with a specific activity, yet still chooses to participate.

In such cases, if an injury occurs, the individual cannot claim damages for that injury because they had consented to the risk by taking part in the activity after acknowledging its inherent dangers. This principle serves as a defense against liability for those who are accused of negligent conduct.

The other options do not accurately represent the concept of assumption of risk. For instance, arguing non-involvement in the event does not relate to accepting risks, nor does claiming an accident without fault. Additionally, stating that there was a lack of proper warning contradicts the very essence of being aware and accepting the risk.