Oh. Ok. But no. I actually was disputing your premise: holding a manufacturer accountable for anything that could potentially go wrong with their product due to not using it as it was intended or deemed unsafe to do is ok.

But you'd rather turn it into me supposedly making an invalid comparison, which I didn't.

And I do get your points.

BTW:

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/reg...ome&position=0

see also:
Attorney Grievance Commission of Maryland v. Protokowicz, Md.App.Ct., 619 A.2d 100 (1993)
http://74.125.45.104/search?q=cache:...ient=firefox-a

Neither of those stories you’ve posted are about idiots trying to “dry” their pets in microwaves. Those people are messed in the head, full stop

And, I never said that manufacturers should be held responsible for “anything that could potentially go wrong with their product”. I said I felt that manufactures are responsible “to ensure they are selling a product which will be equally safe for consumers, no matter where it is consumed” (if they are going to be responsible exporters).

Each of us will have our own opinions on this, Gazelle. To each their own, Caveat Emptor, c’est la vie and all that jazz.

Cherie

BTW, I do agree that “A Hairy Chicken Is Better Than A Hairy Hand!”