> and if you have Boeing stocks in your portfolio, then you are a shareholder, so maybe you should go to jail.
Personally, I'm not opposed to that type of thing happening - I always thought a company being "public" is an oxymoron, since they only serve the shareholders (just look how Facebook prefers to serve its shareholders/execs over democracy... but I digress). If you can't fund terrorist organizations without consequences, then I think there should be equal consequences when your demands for your share values compromise the safety of society. Also, might cause people to keep the companies 'in check' if their own butts were on the line too... But that'd be another whole discussion for another time...
The whole point of consequences is to discourage future bad behaviour: "Wow, that guy's and his family's life is ruined now! Shit, I don't want the same thing to happen to me, I'd better be more careful than he was!". But if all anyone gets is a slap on the wrist, or find a scapegoat, then really what's the point of laws (especially when a nobody gets years in jail for a minor crime, but some high-profile execs can charm/buy their way out with little consequences).
More and more of this reveals that there was very little "involuntary" things happening - they were quite deliberate in what they did, and knew what they were doing wasn't on the "up and up" and compromised safety (with even someone saying "I wouldn't fly on one of those!").
Personally, I'm not opposed to that type of thing happening - I always thought a company being "public" is an oxymoron, since they only serve the shareholders (just look how Facebook prefers to serve its shareholders/execs over democracy... but I digress). If you can't fund terrorist organizations without consequences, then I think there should be equal consequences when your demands for your share values compromise the safety of society. Also, might cause people to keep the companies 'in check' if their own butts were on the line too... But that'd be another whole discussion for another time...
The whole point of consequences is to discourage future bad behaviour: "Wow, that guy's and his family's life is ruined now! Shit, I don't want the same thing to happen to me, I'd better be more careful than he was!". But if all anyone gets is a slap on the wrist, or find a scapegoat, then really what's the point of laws (especially when a nobody gets years in jail for a minor crime, but some high-profile execs can charm/buy their way out with little consequences).
More and more of this reveals that there was very little "involuntary" things happening - they were quite deliberate in what they did, and knew what they were doing wasn't on the "up and up" and compromised safety (with even someone saying "I wouldn't fly on one of those!").