The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark The Legal Examiner Mark search twitter facebook feed linkedin instagram google-plus avvo phone envelope checkmark mail-reply spinner error close
Skip to main content

Today I came across an article dealing with “absurd” warning labels. After reading this article, I thought about how extreme examples of the product safety debate are not necessarily the appropriate forum to determine whether corporations should be held accountable when products are unreasonably defective and cause injury. A product is considered defective if it is considered unreasonably dangerous to the ordinary user. For example, should business be held accountable for defective tires on an SUV when the tire tread has a tendency to separate at high speeds causing rollovers? Should business be held accountable for faulty propane gas installation into a home which leaks gas into the family living space?

The real debate should not be about supposed frivolous lawsuits but rather whether a business should be held accountable when its products are not safe and cause injury. The Association of Trial Lawyers of America provides further information about product dangers, the safety debate, and how corporate accountability makes products safer. Click here for specific products which are safer today as a result of corporate accountability. Asking the simple question about whether cars would have seat belts or airbags without the threat of accountability from our civil justice system should make it clear why we need product liability accountability without government interference.

Comments are closed.

Of Interest