Subject:
|
Re: Stop the madness...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 11 Sep 2003 18:29:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
239 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal wrote:
> > In lugnet.off-topic.debate, David Koudys wrote:
> >
> > > Or how about people live with the consequences of their own actions.
> > > There's a radical thought.
> >
> > To a liberal.
>
> I'd be interested to learn the political leanings of the aforementioned
> paralyzed drunkard. After all, we know that Conservatives absolutely adore and
> support actions free of consequence.
>
> Dave!
Not to be stereotypical, but if I hear 'intoxicated man', 'atttempting to use a
slip 'n slide' and 'sue for all you can get', my immediate thought is 'college
age punk kid who doesn't give a whit about politics or issues'
To expound--first, getting hammered enuf to use a slip 'n slide bad enuf to
become paralyzed. It's a slip 'n slide--thousands of 5 year olds use 'em all
the time without nary a scratch. I've seen relatively few folks over the age
of, say, 25 who would get hammered *and then* try to use a slip 'n slide.
Possible to be sure, but the mindset sounds like someone at a 'kegger'.
Secondly, sueing a faceless corporation for millions of dollars for damages that
are the direct result of ones own stupidity. Well, another ancedote indirectly
related to the corp. for which I work--this is where the "But for" clause comes
in.
A school bus parked on the side of the road--well off the road on the shoulder,
I may add, was hit by a pickup truck driven by, here's a surprise, a drunk
driver. Driver of said pickup was paralyzed due to injuries sustained and
successfully sued the school bus company (who will remain nameless) for millions
of dollars.
"But for" the fact that the school bus driver obeyed all the traffic regulations
of the state, but didn't follow standard 'company guidelines' when dealing with
an insolent child on the bus(1), the corp. was found negligent and not the drunk
driver.
But for the fact that some kids left their slip 'n slide in their yard
(supposing--never stated), this intoxicated man wouldn't have attempted to use
said device and wouldn't have ended up paralyzed.
Yeah, he probably would have gotten in a car and drove into a school bus.
Dave K
1. Standard company guidelines of this 'name-not-mentioned' school bus company
is that the driver of a school bus is suppose to pull over 'immediately' when a
child misbehaves. The driver issued a few warnings while still on the road, and
then pulled over to deal with the child. That extra 500 feet was, according to
the lawyers, the reason the drunken man was paralyzed--nothing to do with the
fact that the guy was drunk and driving.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Stop the madness...
|
| (...) I'd be interested to learn the political leanings of the aforementioned paralyzed drunkard. After all, we know that Conservatives absolutely adore and support actions free of consequence. Dave! (21 years ago, 11-Sep-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
10 Messages in This Thread:
 
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
