Author Topic: Are you disgusted by... (Read 1435 times)

Bodhi · « **on:** September 10, 2003, 06:36:11 AM »

Was watching the news this morning about the federal judge allowing the 4 individuals to sue United, American, and the Port Authority of NY and NJ. Frankly, I am quite disgusted by it. It is sad that their loved ones died, but this is more lunacy. They (the suers) were on TV this morning demanding that (insert everyone and anything) be held accountable for the deaths of their loved one. Why don't they sue Saudi Arabia for raising terrorists, or even Canada for allowing some of them to use them as a port of entry. WHile they are at it, sue the military for not shooting the aircraft down fast enough, then sue the security company (prolly Argenbrite) for not picking up on them, then sue the FAA for not catching on and toughening security, then sue the "where's the beef Lady" just because she annoys you.

Ahhh, this is such a bunch of bull*****, I hope they (the plantiffs)have pianos fall on their heads.

Fatty · « **Reply #1 on:** September 10, 2003, 06:48:35 AM »

Voting tort reform here in TX on Saturday.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/election/2003/state/0904lawyers.html

ra · « **Reply #2 on:** September 10, 2003, 06:48:39 AM »

Lawyers.

rpm · « **Reply #3 on:** September 10, 2003, 07:23:37 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fatty
Voting tort reform here in TX on Saturday.

http://www.statesman.com/news/content/election/2003/state/0904lawyers.html

Vote AGAINST Prop.12!

Eagler · « **Reply #4 on:** September 10, 2003, 07:24:17 AM »

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=95879

its an action of greed which will hurt the entire nation if the airlines have to take a second financial hit from the 9/11 terrorists actions...

Fatty · « **Reply #5 on:** September 10, 2003, 07:37:41 AM »

Not likely rpm. Most of us are tired of paying for what should have been criminal prosecution in the first place.

No amount of slick ads is going to change that.

Speaking of, the latest round, the "leave the power in the courts" is not a very good campaign. Heck the proponents should use that phrase. We're supposed to be swayed by the horror of allowing laws to be made by the legislative branch?

rpm · « **Reply #6 on:** September 10, 2003, 07:46:07 AM »

Is that why almost EVERY major paper in the state has come out AGAINST Prop. 12? The tearjerker commercials of all the doctors leaving Texas if it does not pass just don't fly. They said the same thing the last time they tried to pass this. The problem MOST Texas doctors face is getting paid FROM the Health Insurance companies, not paying their malpractice premiums.

Fatty · « **Reply #7 on:** September 10, 2003, 07:53:18 AM »

Most papers in this state, on a good day, rival a middle school journalism project.

This isn't just doctors vs lawyers, it's stemming litigation run amok.

JimBear · « **Reply #8 on:** September 10, 2003, 08:36:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Fatty
Not likely rpm. Most of us are tired of paying for what should have been criminal prosecution in the first place.

I have to agree with you on this Fatty. I am still of two minds on Prop 12 and what it really means. One thing I am sure of though is that the premise that if its passed malpractice insurance rates will hold much less go down is BS.

Curval · « **Reply #9 on:** September 10, 2003, 08:42:31 AM »

It's sad that their loved ones died..but they should have a piano dropped on their heads?

I don't disagree that this is litigation run amok..but if my family was killed I'd be looking to lash out at anyone and everyone potentially responsible.

Don't blame the plaintiffs in this particular case...blame the millions and millions before them who created the litigious atmosphere in the US.

Lance · « **Reply #10 on:** September 10, 2003, 09:54:34 AM »

Prop 12 is communist! Putting a revenue cap on plaintiff income?! Pshaw!

Rude · « **Reply #11 on:** September 10, 2003, 10:11:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by rpm371
Vote AGAINST Prop.12!

Why?

DoctorYO · « **Reply #12 on:** September 10, 2003, 10:31:18 AM »

How long has the threat of hijacking been around...

Im late twenties and as long as i can remember its been there...

your telling me thats not at a minimum negligence...

Tarmac security , and especially a reinforced pilots door would have prevented Sept 11th.. 500 people(crashed/exploded) vs 3000(airplane missle/tower collapse) very easy math to me...

IMO airlines are at fault.. their corporate greed instead of protecting their assets and more importantly their customers from attack..

If this was some new form of aggression i could cut them some slack but some 30 years of ignoring threat is asinine.

Now I dont agree with the suit against the Port authority becuase you cannot protect against a airplane missle. Thats just greedy lawyers trying to make some loot...

But the case against the airlines is extremely valid... My opinion is that they will lose too..

Any trial lawyer if going to establish the pattern of hijacking over the past 30 years and then he/she will ask what has been done about it... Airlines will have really zero rebuttal on that... They can say it cost too much, but with all the suits against the auto industry that wont fly... Exp: Auto industy has problem they fix it or get sued... Hence vehicle recalls etc...

This case is cut and dry... Only thru congress or BushCo manipulation will the airlines have any success against this claim...

My 2 cents

DoctorYo

ra · « **Reply #13 on:** September 10, 2003, 10:39:07 AM »

Quote

IMO airlines are at fault.. their corporate greed instead of protecting there assets and more importanly their customers from attack..

Ah, the old corporate greed mantra.

Airlines have nothing to do with keeping terrorists out of the country, and they have very little to do with airport security. Those are government functions. But you can sue airlines and not the government, so the lawyers (the biggest contributers to the Democrats, btw) go after the airlines.

ra

midnight Target · « **Reply #14 on:** September 10, 2003, 10:50:21 AM »

Freedom isn't free.