That can only work if people abandon reason, claiming instead that the logical explanation is too “crazy” to be true.
Which of these scenarios was true, for HRS 841-3 to not be in effect?
1) Nobody died.
2) Nobody died under circumstances where HRS 841-3 requires a complete investiqation (unattended by a doctor, suddenly when in apparent qood health, and/or as the result of an accident, for instance...).
3) Somebody died under HRS 841-3 circumstances but it was outside MCPD’s jurisdiction.
4)Somebody died in HRS 841-3 circumstances in MCPD jurisdiction but MCPD was never notified of the death
Let’s take the hysterics and egos out of this and do simple deductive reasoning. That is the way we keep from making fools out of ourselves.
Which is it - 1, 2, 3, or 4?
How 'bout I don't play your straw man game?
Suppose I pick Option #5?
Maybe if we think about it without deciding ahead of time what the outcome should be we'll come up with option #6.
Or maybe "None Of The Above."
(Hat tip to CpnHook for Option #5.)