Discussion: View Thread

Over the past century, executives in many businesses have marketed products that they knew would kill a large number of people, both purchasers and others. Obvious examples are executives in the tobacco, asbestos, and gun industries. How do these executives differ from ordinary murderers? There are of course many general differences. Executives do not, for example, literally kill people; often the buyers do to themselves what eventually kills them. Nor do executives intend the deaths their products cause. Those deaths are, one might argue, unintended side effects of legitimate business activities, such as selling cars to people, some of whom will be killed in accidents. Some people argue, moreover, that insofar as responsibility for the deaths extends beyond the purchasers, it is not individuals but collectives, such as corporations, that bear that responsibility. I will analyze these and other general differences in an effort to determine how significant they may be morally. I will, in addition, attempt to determine to what extent executives might be liable to be harmed defensively, or to be punished or compelled to compensate victims.