Criminal liability for negligent business practices
There are quite a number of companies out there who provide products or services that require high standards of safety and cannot tolerate corner-cutting.
But, as we have all seen, time and time again businesess often cut corners and such corner cutting leads to disaster. Often times, the people making the decsions to cut corners are fully aware of the risks, but decide that even an unacceptably high risk for failure and injury/death is worth it for the extra profit.
Some companies have used sub-standard parts on mission-critical parts of their products to save as little as half a penny, even though they knew it could lead to the death of the user.
Airline security companies have shown flagrant contempt for the standards set forth by the FAA and the individual airports. Resulting in the deaths of thousands. Even now, things have not improved.
When something bad happens, or they are caught, a fine is levyed and business goes on.
I think thing should be far different.
CEOs and those making decisions with life-or-death consequences should be held criminally liable for their actions. You decide that saftey regulations are not as important as profit? Fine, be that way, but realize you are going to prision.
Furthermore, a consistant pattern of law-breaking and negligence by a company should be grounds for considering such an organization a criminal enterprise with all that entails.
Comments?
But, as we have all seen, time and time again businesess often cut corners and such corner cutting leads to disaster. Often times, the people making the decsions to cut corners are fully aware of the risks, but decide that even an unacceptably high risk for failure and injury/death is worth it for the extra profit.
Some companies have used sub-standard parts on mission-critical parts of their products to save as little as half a penny, even though they knew it could lead to the death of the user.
Airline security companies have shown flagrant contempt for the standards set forth by the FAA and the individual airports. Resulting in the deaths of thousands. Even now, things have not improved.
When something bad happens, or they are caught, a fine is levyed and business goes on.
I think thing should be far different.
CEOs and those making decisions with life-or-death consequences should be held criminally liable for their actions. You decide that saftey regulations are not as important as profit? Fine, be that way, but realize you are going to prision.
Furthermore, a consistant pattern of law-breaking and negligence by a company should be grounds for considering such an organization a criminal enterprise with all that entails.
Comments?
Comments
<strong>There is criminal liability for negligent business practices. It's called a strict liability theory of crime.</strong><hr></blockquote>Strict liability theory is more general than that, though. The theory is that you are judged solely on the outcome of your behavior, rather than your motivation or any other context. And it's virtually never applied in criminal law; speeding tickets might be one example.
Strict liability applied to corporations almost always refers to civil law - that they can pay damages if the effect of their behavior is to harm someone, even if they didn't intend to harm.
<strong>Strict liability theory is more general than that, though.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Oh, I know that... he just asked about criminal liability, though.
1. The cases aren't brought by the gov't, they're brought by individuals.
2. It's easier to win a civil case.
<strong>I can think of two reasons why tort rather than criminal law may be preferable.
1. The cases aren't brought by the gov't, they're brought by individuals.
2. It's easier to win a civil case.</strong><hr></blockquote>
3. You can sue for specific performance. Better results than simply getting J. Q. CEO behind bars. What does that settle?