In this story by the New York Times, some of the survivors of the shootings said they have thought about how much of their medical bills they would have to pay.

It turns out that all of the 13 survivors had health insurance, including Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, who has top-of-the-line federal insurance. And there are pots of money, from federal and nonprofit sources, that will help defray other costs, such as travel to the trial and maybe counseling and even new glasses.

The bills aren't all in yet, and surely the victims have copays and deductibles, but the hospitals that treated the survivors say they expect insurance to cover the bulk of the costs.

But what if they didn't have insurance? Should they or their families have to pay a dime now or if a problem arises later?

If they shouldn't have to pay, who should? And what about victims of car crashes or other disasters or accidents -- or in Baltimore, crossfire -- beyond the victims' control? The victims and families of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks were compensated, but only recently did Congress step in to provide full medical care for the first responders.

Those who can't pay for medical care are treated anyway, and the public pays either through taxes or higher premiums. There is no "do not treat" list. But many struggle with bills when they get sick or hurt, or whether it's their own fault or not. So, where is the line? 

Reuters photo