Subject:
|
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 25 Jan 2000 23:10:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2184 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> I wasn't a 100% fan of Truman but he did have one thing on his desk that
> pretty much summed it up for me...
>
> A sign that said "the buck stops here"
>
> James Brown wrote:
> >
> > What puzzles me about this whole argument is how you(in the general sense)
> > can be advocating person x being responsible for person y's actions? If
> > someone else causes a violation of rights, how can I being punished for
> > that if I'm not directly linked to their actions? That seems contradictory
> > to the underpinnings of libertarian thought.
> >
> > Now, if said company officers can be shown beyond reasonable doubt to be
> > responsible, then heck yeah, throw the book at them! But if they're not
> > involved, why are they at fault?
>
> They're the CEO. By definition, they're involved. Start enforcing that
> thinking and you are going to see big corporations being a lot more
> careful.
I understand the sentiment, but I don't understand the position.
You(the collective you) appear to say that the officers of a company are
liable for the actions of that company REGARDLESS of whether or not they are
personally responsible, or personally involved.
That is just plain wrong, IMHO, and I can't get around it.
How do you justify person X being responsible for person Y's actions? Boiled
down, that's exactly what you are claiming here.
To put it another way, you are saying that lacking evidence to the contrary,
the CEO of any given corporation is guilty of any crimes commited by anyone in
that organization. That places the burden of proof in the wrong direction -
Guilt is assumed, and people have to prove their innocence. How does that
jive with "people are essentially good"?
James
http://www.shades-of-night.com/lego/
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
|
| <3885F82B.31DF@mindspring.com> <FoLIpw.MEu@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit I wasn't a 100% fan of Truman but he did have one thing on his desk that pretty much summed it up for me... A sign (...) (24 years ago, 25-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
