Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on November 21, 2002, 08:25:19 AM
-
Remember when I joked about Rosie O'Donnell should sue the silverware manufacturers for making her fat, in one of our Gun threads?
Lawyers have filed a class-action lawsuit against McDonald's on behalf of New York children who have suffered health problems, including diabetes, high blood pressure, and obesity."
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/US/ap20021121_675.html
"Here lies Personal Responsibility and Accountability, may they rest in peace"
-
I think we should have more personal responsibility. That's why I'm pro-choice.
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
I think we should have more personal responsibility. That's why I'm pro-choice.
I think we should have more PR too, thats why I am against mothers sueing gun manufacturers.
-
I should start off by saying that I have no idea about the validity of what I'm about to say. It is 100% hearsay, with added conjecture on my part. I do not vouch for its authenticity in the lease, it was just something that has been bouncing around in my head for a week or so.
My wife is pregnant with our first child. During one of her regular visits to the Doc, they had a conversation about how much weight a woman should gain during pregnancy. The Doc gave her a review of the past few decades of baby having. From this conversation (this is the hearsay, the conjecture comes later) I gathered that in the 70's women were discouraged from gaining much weight during pregnancy, and as a result, there were some health problems, including low birth-weight babies. So Doctors shifted gears in the 80's-90s, and went with a Doritos style advice "Eat all you want, we'll make more" "And the result was fat babies. So I'm wondering what carry over effect, if any, children get from their mothers consumption habits during pregnancy? Could this be a factor in the giant children problem in this country? In my opinion the ultimate responsibility lies with the parents, but I wonder how much biology might play in this.
Of course, others might talk about the convinience of fast food, and an increase in two income families as a contributing factor. I don't think that McDonalds will have a problem overcoming this lawsuite, given the number of variables involved, but who knows?
-Sik
-
Gaining too much weight during pregnancy can bring on "Pregnancy-induced diabetes". They usually monitor the mothers weight closely today, they don't want them eating too much or too little.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Gaining too much weight during pregnancy can bring on "Pregnancy-induced diabetes". They usually monitor the mothers weight closely today, they don't want them eating too much or too little.
Yeah, this is how the whole conversation came up.
-Sik
-
Hey, congrats on the first child! Good to know "that thing works" ? :)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Gaining too much weight during pregnancy can bring on "Pregnancy-induced diabetes".
not to mention the mother :)
-
gag..
yeah and it's Dairy Queen's fault that their stuff is fattening,
etc etc
I'm suing game companies because I end up sitting on my bellybutton and playing them causing weight gain, posture problems and think how many ex-gf's/wives they pissed off
wait..
that could be a good thing...
-
Sikboy told me he was pretty sure the baby was his too.
Sorry for the blatant joke theft. Congrats and thanks for the hospitality.
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
I think we should have more personal responsibility. That's why I'm pro-choice.
Personal responsibility like in not getting pregnant in the first place? Is that the personal reponsibility you speak of?
Just curious.
-
No - having the right to do something, but carrying the responsibility for not abusing that right.
Why should you automatically think of abortion, anyway? 'Pro-choice' can mean so many things. People suing the arse of whoever they like for ridiculous things is an example of the irresponsible use of legal rights.
-
Good Cod, we need to start shooting lawyers. No offense to any lawyers currently reading this post :D
What happened to the good 'ol days of taking freaking responsibility for yourself. Time to find a new rock to live on... This one has gone to hell.... :(
-
Originally posted by Dowding (Work)
No - having the right to do something, but carrying the responsibility for not abusing that right.
Why should you automatically think of abortion, anyway? 'Pro-choice' can mean so many things. People suing the arse of whoever they like for ridiculous things is an example of the irresponsible use of legal rights.
Well, Pro-Choice in this country relates to the abortion issue....thus my remark.
Regarding the abuse of legal rights...I agree. The justice system in America is embarrassing.
-
Ronald McDonald was caught destroying documents/emails btwn McD's corporate officers describing plans to add even more addictive peanut oil to the fries & additional fattie beef & mayo to their big mac, upping the super size size while refusing to print health hazard warnings on their bags and boxes
(http://www.rmhcchicago.org/img/ronald.gif)
"It ain't my fault, it tasted TOO good to quit eating them. More fries please!"
you wait, someone will get something out of this ridiculous abuse of our justice system
-
How about we tell some good lawyer jokes? I'll start it off...
Question: What do you call it when you have 12 lawyers on the bottom of a river?
Answer: A good start!
Alright...now let's hear yours!
Shuckins
-
Oops, that last message went in under one of my student's accounts. I gotta keep them off this computer.
Shuckins
-
lol
hard working teachers! sheesh
-
Sure, I'll buy that.
But it's more an issue of a legal system run amok IMO.
-
wlfgang,
I'll have you know I DO work hard...just not so's you'ld notice!
Seriously, if I am caught up on my work during my prep period I relax on the bbs.
Shuckins
-
I'm not one to talk..
I find a lot of time, between builds or downloads or whatever, at work to BBS BS
-
God what BS that suit is. Lawyers who start crap like that need to be summarily executed.
-
Why stop at those lawyers funked... I mean if we to all the trouble to start why not finish the job right! :D
-
Actually its the JUDGES that ought to be executed, THEY are the ones that allow this crap in their courtroom. THEY are the ones that give the nod on the $$ amount of the lawsuits, even if a jury determines the amount, the judge still has to John Hancock the amount as well.
If I was a judge (damn, lot of you would shiver!) I'd throw this thing right out of the court room.
-
Judges are just lawyers with robes. "Execute every last one of 'em."
-
So, lemme get this straight... those fat lil' bastards sustained themselves solely on Mickey D's food? Particularly french fries and nuggets that are cooked, and thusly soaked, in fatty oil?
Common sense tells me these people are retards and it's amazing they haven't suffered catastrophic heart failure.
-SW
-
"Actually its the JUDGES that ought to be executed"
Buh, buh, but....what about the ones appointed by so called conservatives?
Your not suggesting they might be part of the problem too?
Are you?
-
Originally posted by weazel
"Actually its the JUDGES that ought to be executed"
Buh, buh, but....what about the ones appointed by so called conservatives?
Your not suggesting they might be part of the problem too?
Are you?
Politics aside, if they are stupid enough to let the cases like this be heard, NUKE EM! :) (incidently, the Lawyers usually will FILE these cases where a liberal judge resides)
-
Like I've said before in numerous threads...Americans have major trouble balming themselves for their faults.
"It's not MY fault I'm a fat slob...it's McD's for making the food that made me fat!"
"It's not MY fault I have high blood pressure, it's BK's for serving me fries that are cooked in oil!"
"It's not my fault I had a heart attack, it's KFC's for making their 'chicken' taste good!"
And seeing how this is becoming the norm, and just EVERYONE has the Sue me, Sue You blues, I'm wondering what the next big lawsuit will be.
"NYPD sues Dunkin' Donuts for lowering the efficiency of their officers!"
That sounds about right, don't you agree?
-
In California we had somebody sue a gun manufacturer because their son shot himself (intentionally) with a pistol from that manufacturer.
-
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? ;)
-
texace you're right man.. sadly.
-
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
-
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.
-
well this is refreshing... never seen a lawsuit a liberal didn't like before... and advocating personal responsibility? where will it all end?
lazs
-
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.
-
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.
-
here here!!!
PEI for president or something.... ! :)
-
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'