It is irritating that people who burble on about other people 'taking responsibility' for damages are usually making sure that people who have NOT taken their responsibilities seriously are getting out of paying to the people who have been damaged by that lack of responsibility.

Example:
Company does not maintain its equipment properly; Operator is not given time, training or tools to check that the equipment is operating properly (safely); "Interfering bureaucracy" in the form of assorted inspectors has been privatized &/or cut back in the course of "deregulation"& "self-regulation"; Customer has very little chance of having the skills or opportunity to check equipment & assumes that original certification & permission assures them of some standards; Customer is injured by unsafe equipment, requires medical treatment, can no longer work in their occupation; Customer is then told that s/he should "take responsibility" for putting themselves at risk.

(Strangely, I haven't yet heard this said in to relation to Pan Pharmaceuticals, but I've heard it applied in a variety of other incidents.)

Surely the company should "take responsibility" by paying for the medical treatment, lost income & punitive damages for being so carelessly, callously greedy & lazy. This was, I thought, precisely the reason for having punitive damages - deterrence, I believe it's called.
[permalink][comment] - posted by Mez @ 10/12/2003 12:11:00 am