Rapaire, The most insidious use and misuse of risk management comes in the form of research that is commonly called
Cost Risk Benefit Analysis.

Lets take the 300 tazer deaths (not the 30 that the taser industry reported - moving the dicimal point is very popular these days)

300 deaths out of 1,000,000 tazerings is a small percentage.
Also there are fewer reported injuries inflicted upon police personnel.

The cost risk benefit sounds good but as you said "it should only be used in a life threatening situation" and this is no part of the analysis.

An unconcious woman in diabetic coma was tasered by a cop to see if she was awake. A handcuffed pregant woman was tasered after immobilized. A man was tasered in a swamp. A man was tasered in a Mickey D's after complaining in a loud voice that he was badly burned by a McDonalds hot apple pie.
These true life examples do not influence the cost risk analysis.

OTher uses of the CRA allows a certain dose of poison or pesticide or heavy metal to be dosed to you per serving.
Yet it does not take into to account cummulative effects.

Cost Risk Management is used by corporations to legally kill an allowable number of people.

Sometimes when a procedure will guarantee the murder of a person it still is still deemed a good thing for the speculative "long run" knowledge that will be gained..

When a vaccine is known to hurt a certain number of people it is decoded by the CRA formula that it is OK.

Whats the problem?

Its the people who often $profit that chose the number...not you.

In goverment the CRA is the measuring stick for nearly everything.
You don;t think it would be avused just for political reasons do you?