4 ms·
I wonder if he was making the opposite point. That enforcing safety at a society level is not productive.
by hnuser1234 9y ago
I wonder if he was making the opposite point. That enforcing safety at a society level is not productive.
- cloverich 9y agoI don't think so. Its a common argument that generally available products should be safe by default, not safe because of training. The reply is a bit of a straw man, there's obviously nuances to that stance. In this case, expecting _everyone_ to know exactly how a wire brush is unsafe is not realistic. If there weren't alternatives, well, there wouldn't be much to do. But in this case, there's plenty of safe alternatives to wire brushes, thus a strong argument can be made that they should simply be banned.
- jcims 9y agoWhat would such a ban look like? No wire brushes for BBQs? What about the wire brushes they have in the hardware aisle? Do they need to add 'not for BBQs' to the label? Seems like good fodder for tabloid evening news and then just let it be.
- khedoros1 9y agoMost people are just going to go to the barbecue aisle and find the "safe" brushes. Someone really determined to buy a wire brush might find the rust-scrapers or something, but that's no different from paint thinner not being sold as a household cleaner. It makes sense to me to make the safe option into the easiest, most obvious path to take. Stop labeling wire brushes as "barbecue brushes", and stop stocking them directly alongside the cooking tools. That's the form I imagine a ban would take.
- hnuser1234 9y agoAh yeah, re-read it and realize I misunderstood.