THIS was gonna happen. I tole y'all back on December 27, 2007, Sorta. I say, parenthetically, that the families, have my sympathy unless and until, they file a lawsuit against the City. And that is what the first link is all about.
I guess when we reached the saturation point of one MILLION lawyers [in the late '80s] it was going to inevitably lead to the point where NO one takes responsibility for ANY foolhardy action they and/or their family members take ever again.
But, isn't it time we said, WHOA! Let's take another look here, folks. This has gotten out of hand! There is not supposed to be a Free Lunch. Every time you stub your toe on a loose curb you are NOT entitled to free medical care for the rest of your flippin life!
If you spill hot coffee in your lap...you DO NOT DESERVE a six figure settlement from McDonalds for not warning you the coffee was HOT, you MORON!
If you take a drug, and you start itching; your mouth, tongue, or throat swells, or you start wheezing, you should NOT be able to sue the manufacturer because you are ALLERGIC. THEY did not purposely activate your immune system. So they should NOT have to pay you for YOUR body's reaction, NOR should they have to buy time on the TeeVee to warn the folks who are too stoopid to come in out of the rain to STOP TAKING THIS DRUG IF THIS HAPPENS TO YOU.
Our justice system is funded by tax money. MY tax money and your tax money. If you don't think about taxes anytime but April...then you haven't paid sales tax or stayed in a motel/hotel or paid property taxes or car taxes lately have you? Some of these tax monies are allocated for a specific purpose....road building and maintenance; education; city, county, state budgets and the tax offices of those entities will provide you with a budget that will explain how your tax money is spent. Take a look at how much is spent on Courts or Justice administrative costs. It can be deceptive because civil suits can be found in City and County and District courts and there are even some at the Federal level. Judges have to be paid, clerks, court reporters, bailiffs, the entire infrastructure in the Courthouse is funded by TAX money. From the janitor who keeps the restroom floor mopped to the Senior District Judge sitting on the bench deciding a Capital Murder case.
Now, imagine if we could eliminate HALF the Civil lawsuits and allocate those resources to clearing the backlog of CRIMINAL cases. No lawyers, clerks, judges, or LE personnel would be out of a job. The lawyers might be practicing a different KIND of law, and they might have to take some refresher courses, but they would still be employed.
I'm not advocating gettin' rid of ALL malpractice or product liability lawsuits. But things have gotten SOOOOO far out of hand that NO-Body even knows how to pronounce the Words PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY anymore.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
Let's see if I can recall the physical setup at that time and place. And I would like to visualize the thought processes of the plaintiffs in this particular cause of action.
The plaintiffs apparently allege that the City of San Francisco was fundamentally remiss in their provisions for the safety of the deceased and injured, not to mention profoundly retarded, offspring. The city kept this dangerous animal within the enclosure and fed it generously so that it presented a false appearance of being calm, non-aggressive, and mindful of its own business. Had they starved and beaten the animal, it might have presented a more vicious daunting aspect, deterring the “victims” from provoking the tigress.
Further, the city provided only minimal restraints of the vicious feline: A concrete dry moat, 33 ft. wide with sheer sides 12'5" deep. Outside said moat was a railing designed to keep humans away from the moat. Coincidentally, a footprint was found atop this barrier, indicating the young men had easily been able to climb it. The city was clearly remiss in not providing an electrified force field on the exterior of these barriers, to prevent the mentally challenged, sweet lil' chern away from the moat.
It seems the city ALSO failed to take steps to prevent healthy everyday activities of the three disadvantaged yutes. They were tiger-mauled and victimized after being forced to consume vodka and marihuana in their sadly outdated 2002 BMW automobile. This led unavoidably to their pelting the tigress with sticks and pine cones while dangling their legs over the edge of the moat. It may yet be proven that the city forced the young men to ignore the warning signs posted around the tiger enclosure and, indeed, elsewhere around the zoo.
Yep, it seems the law suit is sure to go badly for the city . . . .
Normally I use the comments section to comment. I try to keep from rampaging on for too long, but I'd like to take some space up here to add further anguish to your post if that's alright with you, Miss Holly.
The icing on the cake here is that due to the fact that everyone sues for anything at all, no one takes a simple consumer complaint seriously anymore. EVERYTHING filters through some corporate giant's legal department now. It's always up to the lawyers to decide if the company is at risk of losing a lawsuit.
You have an issue with something? You see significant reason for a company to change its product or practice? Don't waste your time even picking up the phone. If you don't plan on faxing your complaint in on attorney letterhead, you may as well sit and scratch your mad spot.
On that note, there is at least SOME respite here. If some Jane Q. Nobody can take on McD's over hot coffee being, well, hot, then it serves to somewhat disprove that it comes down to money. I'm sure McD's had several orders of magnitude more money that did the plantiff in that case, and yet the plantiff came out on top. Granted, her reward got significantly reduced (an event I credit more to the fact that IT FRIGGIN SHOULD HAVE BEEN ZERO than I do to her "crack legal team"), but she still emerged victorious.
Maybe the folks in Chicago and San Fransisco have better than a fighting chance after all.
Okay, I'm done now. Resume normal commenting!
tweaker
What about "you lose - you pay" civil suits? Would that curb the problem or infringe on our inalienable right to be greedy morons?
Very nice pro-personal-responsibilty, anti-government-sponsored-frivolous-lawsuits post. I hate the fact that people can sue other people for just about anything. It should be limited to cases in which you or your property has been physically harmed against your will. Something is not 'against your will' if you engage in consensual commerce, or if you're just an ignorant consumer.
Thanks for reading my Crusty Ambulance Driver Blog and leaving comments. I appreciate it. And yes, you've got me figured out...I'm from Houston. I work at a fire station on T.C. Jester, just north of I-10.
I agree with you on thislaw suit stuff. it has gotten out of hand.
'Our justice system is funded by tax money. MY tax money and your tax money.'
(WHAT tax money? So far as I have been able to read, you don't really do anything for a living.)
Your right that the lawsuit thing has gotten outa hand, but mebbe you should let the CA people do their own thing, by their own rules. Those boys knew that they were in Liberal Land when they messed with the tiger. The zoo knew that they were in Liberal Land when they build the enclosure.
Just a thought and Im not hating.
(WHAT tax money? So far as I have been able to read, you don't really do anything for a living.)
So, let me get this straight: all I have to do is quit my job, and I don't have to pay sales tax, property tax, gas tax, sin taxes (alcohol/tobacco/strippers), registration tax on my cars, all the various taxes on my cellphone, taxes on my TV service, taxes on my power or water, etc.?
Sweet!
tweaker
Remember the old folk song?
"In only ten years
we'll have one million lawyers:
How much can a poor nation stand."
Anon,
Don
Post a Comment