3 ms·
> The whole point of personal responsbility [sic] is that it ends at the people responsible, in this case the parents who left their children unsupservised [sic
by mLuby 6y ago
> The whole point of personal responsbility [sic] is that it ends at the people responsible, in this case the parents who left their children unsupservised [sic] near a high powered electric device.
That's an understandable view, but my view is that the individuals responsible are the ones who designed and approved the dangerous device. The courts should decide which of our views is right.
As a separate point, consider who is hurt more when this goes badly: the company that has some (bad) PR or even (gasp!) a recall, or the parents who enters the room to find their child dead.
- thegrimmest 6y ago> my view is that the individuals responsible are the ones who designed and approved the dangerous device. That's not how that works though. Responsibility is only derived from action or negligence directly (not indirectly) resulting in harm. Lots of devices are dangerous - why do you get to decide what is "safe" and what isn't? As for who is hurt most, I would say it's all of us. Increasing regulation of every aspect of our lives causes tremendous harm to, and increases the barrier to entry for pretty much everything.
- ddingus 6y agoIn many cases, those barriers need to be there. We put them there because learning on the job carnage was excessive. That is how "too dangerous" actually gets decided.