Originally Posted by rich
I'm confused as to the lesser and greater argument.
Is it contended that the risk to the director in terms of corporate liability is greater than the risk to the possessor of the OTT rifle?
It's pretty simply Rich, you take the path of lesser risk when make products available to the public. You test and keep records for ten years proving that you have done everything possible to make the product safe and compatible with the law of the land it's shipping to.
Which is the greater risk?
1. Fitting AT to ensure you've done everything within your power to ensure the gun is legal.
2. Fitting power adjuster that makes the gun possibly illegal at the point of purchase.