That’s the call of today’s Detroit News editorial. “If the goal is to protect consumers, as tort lawyers claim, wouldn’t it be better to seek tougher federal standards rather than sue the people who research, invent and bring to market the products that consumers want? The obvious answer is yes, but that would eliminate a source of continuing revenue for plaintiff’s lawyers.”
“Save auto industry jobs by reforming legal system”
That’s the call of today’s Detroit News editorial. “If the goal is to protect consumers, as tort lawyers claim, wouldn’t it be better to seek tougher federal standards rather than sue the people who research, invent and bring to market the products that consumers want? The obvious answer is yes, but that would eliminate a […]
2 Comments
Isn’t thre a law against saying that out loud? At least in a newspaper? If there isn’t, I’m sure there are some lawyers somewhere trying to “fix” that “oversight”.
That assumes two things not in evidence:
1) that the goal of the plaintiff’s bar is to improve safety
2) that “tougher standards” would be a non-trivial improvement
I should also note that safety improvements always increase weight, which reduces fuel economy and increases pollution. To the extent that the green lobby and the safety at any cost lobby intersect, they advocate mutually contradictory positions.