You're being needlessly argumentative in this thread. I said that there's only one person ultimately responsible. However, it's 100% reasonable for the florist

You're being needlessly argumentative in this thread. I said that there's only one person ultimately responsible. However, it's 100% reasonable for the florist to offer a warning. We give warnings in all sorts of situations, all the time. A warning to prevent the death of a pet, due to a very common oversight, is completely appropriate. I would consider it my moral responsibility to give a warning, if I were a florist. Any florist who does not consider it a moral responsibility of theirs, I consider immoral. You don't like that, but that's fine. I hope you never become a florist, or another person who can influence fallible humans' lives. My whole point here is that specific flower toxicity to cats is a very common oversight. Maybe you were born knowing, maybe you're better at reading the posters which (now) are common at vetrinarians' offices. Maybe you bought "Cats for Dummies" when you turned 18. Maybe you're just awesome. But lots of people who own cats do not know, and I would prefer those people to not have dead cats, more than I'd prefer to pronounce responsibilities from some perch of ridiculous absolutism.