3 ms·
Exactly. You do not need regulations for that if you have laws against poisoning people in place already.
by tluyben2 10y ago
Exactly. You do not need regulations for that if you have laws against poisoning people in place already.
- sgift 10y agoYeah, waiting until someone dies of food poisoning and then judge people instead of checking first if their shop follows basic sanitary requirements.
- tluyben2 10y agoWell, you are running a restaurant right? There must be some balance and regulations are too easy to exploit both ways. As you well know, there are many toilets cleaner than some food places and yet they passed the regulations at some time. I would not want to have my name under a restaurant that runs that risk, while everyone games regulations and avoids the risk legally. If I pass regulations (at one particular moment in time), the insurance will cover damages; if it was the law I would go to prison/pay a high fine. How do you keep regulations fair and enforceable?
- matthewmacleod 10y agoFlouting regulations doesn't mean that you will hurt anybody; you're not necessarily going to cause a large e-coli outbreak if you incorrectly store your meat, for example. But the point is that such risks are increased from a public health perspective – that's what regulations seek to prevent. Waiting until someone becomes poisoned and using the legal system to fix the issue just seems bafflingly short-sighted.
- tluyben2 10y agoWhat I am saying is that, here in Spain and probably elsewhere, the regulations are easy to game and when something happens you cannot use the law as you have a signed paper the place is up to spec.