|
|
I did read what you said Keith and while I appreciated the point you're trying to make, I also wanted to point out what I thought was the flaw in one bit of your reasoning, specifically here:
 Originally Posted by Keith
If the drugs weren't grown/sold originally , the purchasers wouldn't have caused those victims.
If you're going to define a producer's responsibility for their product as being dependent on what the purchaser does with the product, selling anything can be argued to be potentially dangerous and to cause victims. By your logic, if I sell a steak knife to someone who then goes and stabs someone, I'm responsible for the victim of that crime because it wouldn't have happened if I hadn't sold him that steak knife. Never mind that I didn't tell him to do that with it, he did and so now it's my fault for facilitating his behavior. Similarly, if I sell a power tool to some fool who cuts his arm off with it, I'm responsible for that too cause he wouldn't have cut his arm off if i hadn't sold him the tool.
It's not Ong's fault if someone abuses what he's selling them or is ignorant of its effects. And if it is, it's equally the shopkeeper's fault for selling me wine if I go out and run someone over while pissed on it. Or the hardware store owner's fault for selling me the power saw, etc. etc.
|
Reply With Quote
