Reply to this discussion post and make it an paragraph:

I think the intent here goes a long way, and the punishment should change if there was prior knowledge, compared to no prior knowledge. Negligence and accountability should also be taken into consideration here. If the corporate executive had NO KNOWLEDGE of their product killing people, the main thing that should be looked at here would be negligence, which could help dictate the punishment. I think the punishment would and maybe should consist of fines, penalties as far as the product goes, and initiation of more oversight, payment to the family of the victims, etc. A specific example can be seen in the "Ford Pinto" case, where a major manufacturer (Ford) made cars and let them be sold, knowing there was a risk of them exploding in specific crashes. Yes - exploding! Some of the major execs claimed not to know this - did they? I suppose it's hard to say. But without proving they did, the main thing to be looked at here is the neglect and failure to produce safe vehicles.

However, if a corporate executive DID have knowledge that their product was lethal or at least potentially lethal, and then failed to do anything and released the product, this is criminal. I believe that at this point, criminal charges such as manslaughter or even up to second-degree murder (depending on specific details) should be pursued. An example here would be the case of Purdue Pharma. Executives in this case were said to have known how addictive OxyContin was and basically downplayed that addiction, which resulted in many deaths - thousands! So, for this specific case, yes, I think harsher charges should be pursued.