4 ms·

Some amount of liability, though not completely liability makes sense for all these things though. 1. Its reasonable for the public and police to expect you to

Some amount of liability, though not completely liability makes sense for all these things though. 1. Its reasonable for the public and police to expect you to regulate and secure your establishment and keep it from having a negative impact on the community. 2. Weapons are very dangerous and not everyone is licensed to distribute them. Its fair of society to expect you to take reasonable measures to keep them secure. 3. They are liable if its found that leadership haven't taken reasonable measures to make sure employees don't do bad things. You cant benefit from a company's output just to turn a blind eye to what might be illegal activity. 4. If your property isn't reasonably safe, you shouldn't be inviting people onto it, its not fair on those people might be injured, who don't know what to look out for. 5. Your saying Big Pharma has nothing to answer for the opium crisis in in the US right now? A requirement for responsible marketing and prescription of harmful and addictive substances makes complete sense.

skookumchuck 8y ago
Your post pretty much exemplifies what I was talking about. It's the notion that if an adult decides to pull the trigger on the gun he stole, it is someone else's fault. Consider 1. This an overreaching and hopelessly vague statement. It could be interpreted to mean pretty much anything. Consider 2. I bet your home is full of dangerous things. Have you taken steps to secure them all? Consider 3. This is why ex-cons cannot get jobs. It's because there have been successful lawsuits against companies who hired ex-cons, and then some of them committed crimes. The idea is that the employer "should have known" the employee was an ex-con and shouldn't have hired him. Consider 4. I know of cases where a painter set his ladder incorrectly, fell off, and successfully sued the homeowner. Consider 5. Recently there was an HN discussion where doctors have been pressured to simply stop prescribing opioids, thus sending their chronic pain patients to hell.
- jackpeterfletch 8y ago
  I guess we're talking at different levels. Yeah some of these examples are extreme. But I think we can probably agree that there is a balance between accepting gross negligence, and having overzealous legislation.

skookumchuck 8y ago

Your post pretty much exemplifies what I was talking about. It's the notion that if an adult decides to pull the trigger on the gun he stole, it is someone else's fault. Consider 1. This an overreaching and hopelessly vague statement. It could be interpreted to mean pretty much anything. Consider 2. I bet your home is full of dangerous things. Have you taken steps to secure them all? Consider 3. This is why ex-cons cannot get jobs. It's because there have been successful lawsuits against companies who hired ex-cons, and then some of them committed crimes. The idea is that the employer "should have known" the employee was an ex-con and shouldn't have hired him. Consider 4. I know of cases where a painter set his ladder incorrectly, fell off, and successfully sued the homeowner. Consider 5. Recently there was an HN discussion where doctors have been pressured to simply stop prescribing opioids, thus sending their chronic pain patients to hell.

jackpeterfletch 8y ago
I guess we're talking at different levels. Yeah some of these examples are extreme. But I think we can probably agree that there is a balance between accepting gross negligence, and having overzealous legislation.