4 ms·

The financial consequences are nothing for the company, even less for those responsible. For accountability there need to be personal consequences for cases of

The financial consequences are nothing for the company, even less for those responsible. For accountability there need to be personal consequences for cases of extreme and wilful negligence for cases like Boeings. I’m not advocating for life in prison for the top brass, but some prison time surely. Unless we just start issuing fines and warnings to the regular people to deal with manslaughter of criminal negligence.

Retric 5y ago
Prison for the top brass 1:1 with negligent death essentially removes the possibility of any large company existing even down to hospitals simply can’t exist in such an environment. The paradox here is that aviation for example is filled with cases of negligence causing large numbers of fatalities, while at the same time the industry has become extremely safe. It’s not that negligence has become more common it’s simply rolling the dice more frequently. By comparison having someone install solar panels on your roof is stupid dangerous at scale, but individual homeowners don’t notice that risk. Should we send every homeowner that had solar installed into their homes to prison? If not why should it apply at a larger company. It’s not that these companies get a special expedition, it’s that everyone gets that same exception. Killing a pedestrian for example rarely results in prison time. People are often punished more for a DUI without an accident than a sober fatality caused by simple negligence.
- Swenrekcah 5y ago
  I understand your point, and note I didn’t say 1:1 time. I don’t think you understand though how bad Boeings case was and that we will never be rid of that kind of risk taking when the trade off for the risk takers is piles of money if it goes right but essentially a slap on the wrist if it goes wrong.
  - Retric 5y ago
    That’s fair, I think most agree that some threshold for punishment is a good idea. Deciding where and when that is if it’s not 1:1 gets politically and ideologically messy.

Retric 5y ago

Prison for the top brass 1:1 with negligent death essentially removes the possibility of any large company existing even down to hospitals simply can’t exist in such an environment. The paradox here is that aviation for example is filled with cases of negligence causing large numbers of fatalities, while at the same time the industry has become extremely safe. It’s not that negligence has become more common it’s simply rolling the dice more frequently. By comparison having someone install solar panels on your roof is stupid dangerous at scale, but individual homeowners don’t notice that risk. Should we send every homeowner that had solar installed into their homes to prison? If not why should it apply at a larger company. It’s not that these companies get a special expedition, it’s that everyone gets that same exception. Killing a pedestrian for example rarely results in prison time. People are often punished more for a DUI without an accident than a sober fatality caused by simple negligence.

Swenrekcah 5y ago
I understand your point, and note I didn’t say 1:1 time. I don’t think you understand though how bad Boeings case was and that we will never be rid of that kind of risk taking when the trade off for the risk takers is piles of money if it goes right but essentially a slap on the wrist if it goes wrong.
- Retric 5y ago
  That’s fair, I think most agree that some threshold for punishment is a good idea. Deciding where and when that is if it’s not 1:1 gets politically and ideologically messy.