Quote:
Originally Posted by victorbravo 
The key is assumption of known (or guessed at) risks. That's why the auto example would be acceptable and this proposal would not be.
|
Say that tested it in Russia for the past 10 years. They don't
know how many deaths it would produce, but 75,000 was an average. The intention isn't to kill, it is an unintended by-product. They
do know that deaths will occur, roughly 75,000, but it could be 65,000 one year. And, as I said, they're dedicated to making it safer.
They put it up for a vote here, which way would you go?