It was only a matter of time

[Ripsnort]

Don't forget "Its not MY fault the gun shot that person, its the GUN MANUFACTURER'S fault!"

Do I need to say anything about Tabacco settlements?

[Wlfgng]

texace you're right man.. sadly.

[Eagler]

Originally posted by funkedup
In California we had somebody sue a gun manufacturer because their son shot himself (intentionally) with a pistol from that manufacturer.

In Fl, well west palm, a lady won a case against a gun DISTRIBUTOR as the manufacturer had already gone out of biz. The jury, 6 women, found the gun shop 5% liabale to the murder that was commited by the gun they sold, the school 45% responsible and the owner of the gun (where it was stolen from) the other 50%. As that equals 100% I guess the murdering punk was responsible at all! Darn gun, killed again....

the problem aint the judges or lawyers, its us, the ignorant masses which fill the jury boxes

[Ripsnort]

Originally posted by Eagler


the problem aint the judges or lawyers, its us, the ignorant masses which fill the jury boxes

A case is not heard before a court unless the judge determines it to be valid.  If not, they throw it out of court.  If its gone to the jury for decision, then it failed the first step, responsibility of the judges.  This is why I always emphasis to do alittle back ground check on judges you vote for in your local districts, because tomorrow, those judges may be appointed to the higher courts in the land.

[lazs2]

well this is refreshing... never seen a lawsuit a liberal didn't like before... and advocating personal responsibility?   where will it all end?
lazs

[midnight Target]

The plaintiff files a complaint, which must be answered by the defendants. The parties engage in discovery, a process by which each side gets to uncover all of the documents and information in the possession of the other side related to the case. At times, the lawyers will file motions with the court to seek to dismiss some or all of the claims, narrow the issues, or in general to resolve procedural disputes. Normally, the defendants will seek to have the complaint dismissed prior to trial, on the grounds that the facts could not possibly support a finding against them. If those motions fail, the case ultimately goes to trial or is settled.

[Pei]

For hundreds of years common sense and personal responsibility have been part of the law implicitly. A hundred years ago non-one would be so foolish as to sue a coffee house becuase they spille dhot coffee on themselves. Somehow our society and the law it reflects have changed so I think that now it has become necessary to enshrine common sense an personal responsibility in law explicitly.

All cases should pass the test of "Should the plaintiff, as an adult, have been responsible enough to know how to avoid this situation or would they, using common sense, have known the risks involved and therefore accepted them?".  Children are the responsibility of thier parents or guardians and the rules should be applied to them as well.

Why does society grant certain rights to adults that they don't to children? Becuase adults are expected to be responsible for themselves and use common sense. If you aren't capable of understanding that by letting your kid eat McDonalds three times a week they will get fat then how can you possibly be responsibler enough to be allowed to have kids (and therefore sex) in the first place? Let alone the right to drive a car, own guns, etc.

The current interpretation fo the law in western society is turning us all into children: we have no responsibilities and soon enough we won't have any rights. This path leads to the breakdown of functional society where the only adults are the faceless bureaucracies and corporations.

[Wlfgng]

here here!!!

PEI for president or something.... !  

[MrLars]

Originally posted by lazs2
well this is refreshing... never seen a lawsuit a liberal didn't like before... and advocating personal responsibility?   where will it all end?
lazs

Along the same lines but not exactly the same. Stupid lawsuits aren't filed ONLY by Liberals....

While Governor, Bush signed a series of laws that insulate Texas corporations like Enron and others from lawsuits for their reckless behavior and strip the rights of injured Texans who would be entitled to compensation. These “tort reform” measures include: capping punitive damages – the money that big corporations must pay when they deliberately or recklessly injure or kill someone; diluting the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, which is meant to penalize businesses that engage in deceitful business practices; making it more difficult for the sick and injured to sue malpracticing doctors; immunizing teachers from liability for hitting children (Bush recently signed into law a similar federal bill); and prohibiting Texas cities from suing gun makers and sellers.

Tort restrictions advocated by Bush and Lay do not limit the rights of corporations to sue business competitors for commercial losses. They only prevent injured consumers from suing.

The Texas legislature failed to enact some measures advocated by Bush, Lay and their cohorts. One would curtail class action lawsuits. Another would shield accountants who attest to the validity of bogus financial institutions. Texans for Public Justice, Texans for Lawsuit Reform: How the Texas Tort Tycoons Spent Millions in the 2000 Elections (November 2001).

THE ULTIMATE HYPOCRITES


One would be hard pressed to find worse hypocrites than George W. Bush and Ken Lay. They push for laws to immunize corporations from liability for harming consumers. But when they think they, their families or their businesses have been wronged, they run right to court.

George W. Bush. In 1999, Bush sued Enterprise Rent-A-Car over a minor fender-bender involving one of his daughters in which no one was hurt. Although his insurance would have covered the repair costs making a lawsuit unnecessary, Bush sought additional money from Enterprise, which had rented a car to someone with a suspended license. In this case, Bush seemed to understand one of the most important functions of civil lawsuits — to deter further wrongdoing. The case settled for $2,000 to $2,500. Burger, Timothy, “Bush sued Enterprise Rent-A-Car over daughter’s fender bender,” Daily News, August 26, 2000; “Bush sued rental agency over fender bender,” Houston Chronicle, August 26, 2000.

Ken Lay and Enron. According to Texans for Public Justice, in 1986 Lay sued a driver who rear-ended his daughter’s car, seeking $10,000 in damages including money for “pain and suffering” and “mental anguish.” His daughter did not seek medical care until a week after the accident. In addition, Enron is now suing Dynegy, which pulled out of a merger deal to “rescue” the company. Texans for Public Justice, Enron’s Blackout Cuts Power Behind Numerous Thrones,” Lobby Watch (December 4, 2001).


Center for Justice and Democracy


Just sayin'