Originally Posted by Yorkshiretea
Link to the case?
See again and again you don't understand the greater risk, you just keep nailing home the lesser point. I give up.
There is no link as everything from the bloke concerned is contained in e.mails which I do not have authority to forward/publish. The case took place at Hull Court.
You may well give up because your just trying to defend the indefensible.
Would you place one of your customers in such a position of being legally responsible but unable to do anything about it ? You don't appear to be able to answer.
It is quite often reported that new air rifles are being delivered/sold over power. Often enough to demonstrate that the manufacturers do not have sufficient robust checking/inspection systems in place to stop it. Any airgun delivered/sold over power is an offence committed. That should be high enough on any Directors list as something to avoid.
In no way am I ignoring the greater risk. You are totally ignoring that the importance of any risk is the direction from which it comes to the person at risk.
In my view the greatest risk is being liable in law when there is nothing I can do about it.