Let's take a sample case: the widely known case of Chinese milk producers that sold milk adulterated with melamine. You assume simply labeling the milk with the

Let's take a sample case: the widely known case of Chinese milk producers that sold milk adulterated with melamine. You assume simply labeling the milk with the melamine is all that is required? That the responsibility of not ingesting what could be a lethal poison that can cause renal failure should fall entirely on the consumer alone? Personally, I doubt it (at any rate I am aware of no law where victim ignorance is a defense for a malicious act). Now, I do understand what you are saying for cases where the safety risk is more minimal or specific, labeling is all that is needed. So food safety laws often are fine with people consuming, say, undercooked / raw seafood, provided a warning is given that certain people probably should avoid this type of food. I think in a way we're talking about different things, but "food standards" cover a lot of things. Anyways, this is where I come from in regard to privacy. I don't believe that every time you waive your right to privacy, something awful happens. So I'm not talking about a general ban of waiving the right to privacy. However, I do believe privacy standards need to be strengthened to help prevent (or at least correct) such cases as malicious misuse of private data (example: doxxing) and neglect of private data (example: hacked websites that expose databases of information to criminals).