3 ms·
Lawyers are fixated on the money for obvious reasons, but the money will never really fix what the Sacklers did (particularly for the many victims who are now d
by lupusreal 2y ago
Lawyers are fixated on the money for obvious reasons, but the money will never really fix what the Sacklers did (particularly for the many victims who are now dead.) Restitution is largely a farce and we should be focusing on retribution.
- DANmode 2y agoRemoving the profitability angle mildly dissuades this sort of behavior in the future.
- lupusreal 2y agoI'm all for rendering the Sacklers paupers. Whether that money is given to surviving victims or piled up and burned matters less.
- dylan604 2y agoI'm really not sure what other retribution you're suggesting. There's always public lynching if that's what you're after, but we've kind of decided that is not a good idea in modern society
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- wmf 2y agoThey could be imprisoned.
- lesuorac 2y agoReally unclear how knowingly creating a scenario where people die of overdosing for profit isn't criminal.
- Spivak 2y agoBecause car manufacturers exist, and this isn't theoretical or a jab at cars themselves. We are 100% certain that people will die while using cars, and by cars. Vehicular manslaughter even has a high bar for real punishment precisely because driving a car has an inherent risk of killing others and that risk is legal to take on. Knowing that some people using your product will die, and even that selling more of your product increases the deaths is something we're okay with. It's true of guns, red meat, skateboards, alcohol, lawn mowers, and industrial equipment — all sold for profit. I very much dislike cases like this because while yes, opioids were overprescribed and Purdue sales people did go out and sell often times not in legal ways, doctors still prescribed them and we knew that people dying was necessarily an outcome. So while the crime they actually committed was about kickbacks, not doing the DEAs job enough for them, and lying with statistics they get blamed for the actual deaths which is silly. I take stimulants that double my risk of heart attack and are also known to be addictive, neither outcome is the maker's fault if those happen. It's the tobacco settlement all over again where when bad thing happens the proximate deepest pockets get blamed. I couldn't care less about the government taking money from rich people because reasons, have at it, but I think they're the scapegoat.
- dylan604 2y agoExcept Purdue clearly stated that addiction was not an issue with their product. Car manufactures never say that death is no longer possible with their product. They blatantly misrepresented the dangers of their product in ways none of the other examples you listed come close.
- Spivak 2y agoThey didn't though, they cited a medical journal article where an unaffiliated doctor reported the extremely low addiction rate. Which was true and misleading because short term opioid use addiction rates don't predict long term addiction rates — lying with statistics. And they should be charged and convicted for this, in fact they already were. However, since 2001 every bottle of oxy has made no claim that it's less addictive than other opioids. And we still prescribed them like candy.
- dylan604 2y agoIsn't that a form of punishment instead of retribution?
- lostdog 2y agoJail. Jail would be reasonable for purposefully poisoning tens of millions of people.
- vkou 2y agoBut a scorched earth destruction of their assets would be an appropriate end result. We don't put killers in prison because 10 years will make the dead person alive again. We do it because we don't like them.