To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.off-topic.debateOpen lugnet.off-topic.debate in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 Off-Topic / Debate / 3851
3850  |  3852
Subject: 
Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.off-topic.debate
Date: 
Wed, 19 Jan 2000 20:59:37 GMT
Viewed: 
2406 times
  
Frank Filz wrote:

The main idea though is to make sure that limits on liability are not
legislated. Allow the court review system to determine when reasonable
precautions were taken, and when perhaps someone was a little slipshod.

OK.  I can dance with that.  But, the courts have done some pretty silly
stuff.  (Like McDonald's coffee.) how do we as a society regulate them?
Just fire judges?  There should be some mechanism for helping the courts
be reasonable.

Chris



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
(...) No, by making them hired for life, or at the very least not hired on the basis of the Great Unwashed Masses. Makes for a much better judicial system if you don't have those pesky jury things, either. Crawl out of the judicial sixteenth (...) (25 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?]
 
<FoJtsn.C9w@lugnet.com> <38850984.18212589@eclipse.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Mostly that this sort of thing is hard to talk about in the abstract. I think the longer something goes, the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)

473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact

This Message and its Replies on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR