hopnpop
Regular Member
imported post
HankT wrote:
HankT wrote:
Very good points, logical and true. However, what about the examples that the vast majority of OC-friendly establishments have made? I can't think of a single issue, ever, anywhere, of an establishment being held liable for anything a legal OC-er has ever done. I don't know of any establishment ever having to pay a dime, either directly or indirectly,for being OC-friendly. Can anyone?Cost and risk are BIG factors in retail store policies. It's kind of, uhm, business-like to take those things into consideration. Very normal. Management has an imperative to deal with those kinds of things, making the best decisions for the owners of the firm.
Making the firm liable for our safety is a fine idea--if it could be done. But how?
And what impact would such a change cause in the way of operations expenses? And, subsequently, to prices?