Yeah, I think accidents are not direct aggression.  So a strict reading of the NAP would mean accidents are not a violation.

But that's why we have this concept of a *tort*.

---

**tort** |tôrt|
**noun** *Law*
1. a wrongful act or an infringement of a right (other than under contract) leading to civil legal liability.

###### ORIGIN

###### Middle English (in the general sense **‘wrong, injury’**): from Old French, from medieval Latin tortum **‘wrong, injustice,’** neuter past participle of Latin torquere **‘to twist.’**
---
Unfortunately, the dictionary definition injects *rights* into  scope.  I think the NAP can follow a tort if answered or bypassed if answered.  If an accident occurred, there is only a tort.  If the tort does not then proceed to compensation, then *that* is the act of aggression.

But this is all minutia and syntax.