On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 21:41:11 -0600 Steven Morrey <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think adding personal liability at the executive level, makes it a > bit more threatening. > Decision makers tend to tread lightly, where the veil is thin. It would tend toward personal responsibility. A friend of my family was a stock broker with a seat on the NYSE. He was personally liable for carrying out his side of his trades, and either or both of his two lovely homes were at stake. Another area where we could use some personal responsibility is among cops and persecutors. You violate someone's civil rights, and the government (read: taxpayers) does not compensate the victim, *you* do. Your home, you pension are at stake when you screw up. There is precedent for this. At the time of the American War for Independence, British Ministers were held personally liable for proper respect of the rights of subjects. -- Charles Curley /"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign Looking for fine software \ / Respect for open standards and/or writing? X No HTML/RTF in email http://www.charlescurley.com / \ No M$ Word docs in email Key fingerprint = CE5C 6645 A45A 64E4 94C0 809C FFF6 4C48 4ECD DFDB /* PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug Don't fear the penguin. */
