Mns wrote:
Quote:
regardless of how much regulation you have in place, a mechanical or electrical failure, or some other natural or unnatural event, is going to happen
Let's apply this same logic to something you actually care about.
Terrorist attacks and attempts happen regardless of increased presence in Iraq/Afghanistan/Pakistan/Probably Iran next, so why bother? We can't control every variable.
You're right to some degree here - We can't control every variable. No matter what we put in place our enemies will find a way to counter our preventive measures and, in turn, we'll try to find a way to counter that. That's also a cluster of countries that wish to do us, and our allies, harm. Since they have the intent I have no problem laying waste to them. (They have no problem laying waste to us, either.) Since both sides are dead-locked in destroying each other for whatever reason we need to be proactive in saving American lives, and the lives of our allies.
I guess I value an American/Allys life more than the person who wants us dead. I also value human life over sea life. Since the oil companies aren't building rigs specifically to do harm to humans or sea life, I think that's where the disconnect is; as far as we know this explosion is an accident... people flying planes into out buildings, bombing busses and subways, floating boats into our battleships, wanting to erase our allies off the planet and altogether wishing death on us is no accident.
Using your point... Should we continue to regulate the automotive industry since, regardless of how safe the end product is, people will still find a way to do harm to themselves and to others? How much regulation is needed to have a perfect vehicle that doesn't cause any deaths?
