The_Jazz

Workers Compensation is insurance in every state except North Dakota, Ohio, West Virginia and couple of others (can't remember off the top of my head) where the state provides the coverage (called a monopolistic state). Who do you think pays the benefits? Your employer may have a $250,000 deductible, but the insurance carrier is the one who pays you the money and reimburses the employer (except for your paycheck, where the employer submits a copy of you paystub and is reimbursed). Let me know if you need a list of carriers that write workers comp in your state, and I can give you just about as long a list as you want. There are generally about 100 writing in any state, with a few notable exceptions.

As far as examples, the companies in the Twin Towers on 9/11, or more accurately their insurance carriers, paid well over $1B in workers comp, general liability and life benefits because of the event. Speaking solely on financial terms, that number is obviously dwarfed by loss that the property carriers paid out, but it still managed to bring on an early onset of a hard market for the casualty (liability) markets. If you check my profile, you'll see that I do this for a living, so I'm pretty confident on how this all works. If you'd like any other examples, I'd be copy articles from Business Insurance into a response.

As with anything, the more that you increase the number of potential causes, the greater chance of something occurring. For instance if I walk in areas with more cars driving, I have a greater chance of being hit by a car. If I walk down 16th street in Grinnell, IA east of town (gravel road with very light traffic), I stand a much smaller chance of being hit than if I am crossing the intersection of State and Monroe in Chicago. If fewer people are carrying guns around me, I stand a much smaller chance of being shot on purpose or accidentally.

As for my elevator riding skills, I am not always the most coordinated individual, and I work in a very busy building. It's been known to happen. I've also bumped into people on the street because I lost my balance. What if I slip on the pavement on a wet day and you've neglected to notice that the safety on your Walther PPK slipped into the off position the last time that you put in the holster? That's a live round going who knows where. Sure, it's not an everyday accident, but as soon as you make anything idiot proof someone comes along and builds a better idiot.

Actually, none of these are required by employers. Fire exits are required of building owners, but neither cameras nor security is required of any employer. It may be prudent for reasons other than worker safety, but it is certainly not required. Are there cameras or security guards at your doctors office? How about the guy that puts new siding on your house - does he have cameras and security? What about the local golf course? Book store? Bar? A "safe place to work" generally means free from dangers that pose an iminent threat to the health or safety of the employee, like no asbestos laying around, no piles of broken glass and no uncontained open flames.

[QUOTE=dksuddeth]you've been brainwashed with this idea that guns make people violent. that is completely wrong. people are violent already and those that are violent will use whatever is handy at the time. A gun in responsible hands can be the difference between life and death at the hands of that violent person. If you are not teaching your children that there is a remote possibility that they might be a victim of violence, then you are failing as a parent in that area. all one needs to do is read the paper and listen to the news to know that there will ALWAYS be the possibility of being a victim of violence.[/QUOTE[

The operative term here is "remote". You can't remove that possibility, but by your own admission, I'm more likely to be hit by a car than shot. I will teach my kids to be careful crossing the street and not to antagonize violent people. I have lot more experience in that area than you might think, and I've never been shot at once. I think that you've been brainwashed to expect armed muggers and rapists are lurking around every corner. A gun in the home in more likely to be kill someone accidentially or as a suicide than it is to kill someone purposfully (either as a murder or in self defense). See the 2002 CDC study. It runs about 40% murder/self defense and 60% suicide/accidental shooting. Guns are not inherently evil, being inanimant objects, but arming our society will not do anything to reduce the amount of violence. Quite the opposite - if every one is armed, then an armed response (which is inherently violent in its very nature) by anyone who feels provoked will become the norm.