General => Lounge => Topic started by: Thunder Chicken on March 28, 2007, 11:06:22 PM
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Thunder Chicken on March 28, 2007, 11:06:22 PM
...Some of the disclaimers you see on products and advertisp00gets are crazy. I know there was an email circulating with some of the more foolish ones a while ago, but seeing two commercials tonight made me realize that sometimes it gets a little crazy.
Commercial #1: An older commercial in which the Energizer bunny gives a space ship a "boost" in order to show off how powerful Energizer batteries are. Not a bad idea as commercials go, but I just tonight noticed a bit of fine print at the bottom of the screen. It said "Dramatization. Do not attempt."
Commercial #2: A new pen 15e commercial shows a complete cartoonish fantasy land in which pen 15e is produced by what appears to be small, cute aliens and incredible, but imaginary, machines, in the vein of Charlie & the Chocolate Factory. Again, it said "Dramatization".
So are these two companies so afraid of lawyers that they're afraid we'll sue if we ever come across a stalled space ship and can't get it started by hooking jumper cables to a plush rabbit, or if we ever come across the pen 15e factory and are disappointed that it's produced here on earth by people and big, ugly machines?
When that stupid Lexus that parks itself came out the commercials said "Professional Driver. Closed Course" as it showed the car park itself. Not on a race track, not in a silly place like on a rooftop or anything, but a normal parallel parking situation in a normal city scene. They're selling a technology with a disclaimer that you shouldn't use it.
The Ford Edge commercial that shows the car driving on two wheels along the "edge" of building rooftops has the disclaimer "Dramatization, real cars can't do this". The AWD Fusion commercial that shows the car driving on the side of the building has a similar disclaimer.
Many new cars with NAV systems are designed so that you have to go through several lawyer screens warning you of your imminent and certain death if you so much as even consider using the NAV system while the vehicle is moving. Every single time you start the car. And some prevent you from doing so entirely. And since most NAV systems assimilate the audio and HVAC controls, a simple task like turning up the radio or changing the fan speed is like a trip to the courtroom.
When I lived in an apartment that had a fireplace I used to burn those artificial fire logs because real ones would have been too messy in an apartment. The instructions on how to place the log in the fireplace (with wrapper still on it, with seam facing you) and how to light it on fire (light seam in middle and on both ends), and immediately after the instructions on how to light this FIRE log on FIRE was the ominous warning, in bold letters: CAUTION: RISK OF FIRE
Have lawyers really made society so stupid that a fire warning must be printed on something designed, manufactured and marketed for the sole purpose of burning???
Why is it that a drug company must prove its products are 110% safe, and if somebody so much as catches a cold as a side effect the lawsuits start flying, but cigarette companies are allowed to make and sell products that kill a high percentage of their customers? If a drug saves a million lives it will be taken off the market if one tenth of one percent of the users have a reaction to it.
I think I'm gonna go to law school. There's money to be made off stupidity.
[/rant]
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: cougrrr302 on March 28, 2007, 11:12:38 PM
This my friend is today as we know it. Watch the movie Idiocracy. That is what I see this world coming too. While at work in the Body Shop, the customer has no problem telling me that a problem that has no relevance to what I fixed, was caused by something that I had to have done. Even some dare to come in months later complaining that squeaky brakes or a service light on are the causes of me FIXING there damaged vehicle.
Stupidity at its finest. Im here to back you up man. And please do share your wealth, hmm? lol
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Ifixyawata on March 28, 2007, 11:31:04 PM
And it all started when some woman burned herself on McDonald's coffee...
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: slamedcat on March 28, 2007, 11:54:02 PM
No it started when I saw the warning on a lawn mower that said "DO NOT USE AS HEDGE TRIMMERS"
Who the hell in there right mind said HEY lets pick this thing up and use it to cut the hedges.
And they only keep getting dumber.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: xr7cat on March 29, 2007, 12:47:10 AM
Bill Engval said it best. "I hate stupid people, they should were a sign that says ""I'm Stupid"" that way you wouldn't rely on em." This country is so involved with Political Correctness and being nice to other people because you will be sued if your not. I think lawyers need to only be allowed to do murder and higher such crimes, and the only suing that should be going on is Malpractice and other similar stuff. No because you stuck a AA up your nose!! Sheesh people no longer use common sense.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: thunderjet302 on March 29, 2007, 02:04:36 AM
Quote from: cougrrr302;136992
This my friend is today as we know it. Watch the movie Idiocracy. That is what I see this world coming too. While at work in the Body Shop, the customer has no problem telling me that a problem that has no relevance to what I fixed, was caused by something that I had to have done. Even some dare to come in months later complaining that squeaky brakes or a service light on are the causes of me FIXING there damaged vehicle.
Stupidity at its finest. Im here to back you up man. And please do share your wealth, hmm? lol
I just watched that movie tonight. It made me laugh a lot, but it also scared the hell out of me...............
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: stuntmannick on March 29, 2007, 02:45:14 AM
tv sucks.
And you are right, there is a lot of money to be made off stupid people - that is until they run out of money.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: *MAYHEM* on March 29, 2007, 07:30:01 AM
"And God said let there be Satan, so people don't blame everything on me. And God said let there be lawyers, so people don't blame everything on Satan."
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: longbedGTs on March 29, 2007, 10:10:29 AM
Yup, Id say find a job where you can make money off peoples stupidity. You want job security? There you have it! Its not getting any better, so you might as well take it for all its worth.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Red_LX on March 29, 2007, 10:32:33 AM
Hell, how about this...my girlfriend IS A LAWYER and even she thinks the disclaimers on commercials and products are idiotic.
But unfortunately, thanks to all the frivolous lawsuits, these companies are all walking on eggshells.
I personally like the Scion commercials where they show the animated car and it says "Graphic representation, not actual car."
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Thunder Chicken on March 29, 2007, 10:37:38 AM
I had almost forgotten about the McDonalds coffee case that Brian mentioned. Another oldie-but-goodie: The person that sued Suzuki over the alleged Samurai rollover problem (notice how I said "alleged" - don't want to get sued by Suzuki, y'know). Several people sued Suzuki over this, but the one that sticks out in my mind was the guy that sued even though he had never sat his ass in a Samurai. He was traveling behind a Samurai, and that Samurai "allegedly" rolled over. He stopped to assist, and when he stepped out of his own car he was promptly run over by another vehicle, which then fled he scene. He sued Suzuki, claiming that if the Samurai hadn't rolled over he wouldn't have had to stop to assist, so he never would have been run over. Never mind the fact that had he bothered making sure it was safe before stepping into the street he wouldn't have been hit, either...
A big one in the news recently is the tainted pet food affair. As soon as this recall was announced the first thought in my head (and likely the first thought in just about everybody's head) was "That'll be a lawsuit". Society has actually conditioned us to expect lawsuits every time a mistake has been made. Sure enough, within days of the recall announcement, a class action lawsuit was launched.
Class action lawsuits are usually launched when it is not worth the time (and lawyers' fees) to launch an individual suit. A person losing a $500 yellow lab dog to poison food isn't worth the thousands in lawyers fees. So the lawyers get as many people on the gravy train (dog food related pun intended) as they can. Multiple plaintiffs mean multiple awards and BIG lawyers fees. Funny thing about class action suits: The only ones that make any money are the lawyers. The actual plaintiffs might end up with a $10 gift certificate good for pet food. In the best case scenario the person might be eligible for the cost of the dog pllus his vet expenses, IF he can provide receipts proving that he had been feeding the dog this tainted food, and IF he can prove the dog actually fell ill because of the food and not from something else. Of course, getting that money could prove difficult, if not impossible - Who the hell keeps dog food receipts???
I see this kind of thing all the time, usually with something like faulty computer hardware. A problem with a particular piece of equipment arises, the lawyers get wind of it, and a class action suit is filed. A multi-million dollar settlement is reached. The average Joe that had their equipment fail gets a $10 discount on their next piece of equipment. This person actually lost something (in addition to the cost of the failed equipment they may have lost productivity and/or valuable data). For their losses they are offered a pittance. The company that manufactured the equipment loses millions of dollars, not just in the lawsuit award and their own legal fees, but in lost sales due to a tarnished image. And the lawyers roll about in the money.
Even if the plaintiffs lose the case, lawyers make money. If you sue somebody and your lawyer is working on contingency (no pay if no award), the person or entity that you're suing has to pay their lawyers. It's almost as though the lawyers get together and say "You sue me this week, I'll sue you the next".
I suppose it shouldn't surprise me that in a society run by lawyers (most politicians and their advisors are lawyers), the lawyers are the ones that come out on top...
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: stuntmannick on March 29, 2007, 11:59:36 AM
But wouldn't it be more appropriate to blame the judges and juries? I mean they are the ones that deal out the rulings.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: kingcars on March 29, 2007, 12:48:37 PM
I remember hearing about a lawsuit where a guy driving an RV decided to put the cruise control on, then went to the back for some coffee. Needless to say, it got wrecked, and he sued the company....
...and won.
It's not as much the companies' fault for this, but more so for the dumbass people we have living in this world.
EDIT: While we're on the subject of dumb court cases, here's a good one:
A family was away on vacation. A burglar tried breaking in through the garage and somehow got himself locked in the garage. He had to live off of dog food and Pepsi for a week, then turned around and sued the family for malnutrition...and won.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: thunderjet302 on March 29, 2007, 12:56:21 PM
I work in a public building so I've come to a conclusion: people are dumb :hick:.
I swear I'm smarter than 60% of the people I see on a daily basis. I'm not even that smart I'm just a *B* student.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Ether947 on March 29, 2007, 12:58:59 PM
Quote from: stuntmannick;137044
But wouldn't it be more appropriate to blame the judges and juries? I mean they are the ones that deal out the rulings.
They are just following the law. I would blame the lawyers before them.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Red_LX on March 29, 2007, 01:00:38 PM
Quote from: kingcars;137053
I remember hearing about a lawsuit where a guy driving an RV decided to put the cruise control on, then went to the back for some coffee. Needless to say, it got wrecked, and he sued the company....
...and won.
It's not as much the companies' fault for this, but more so for the dumbass people we have living in this world.
EDIT: While we're on the subject of dumb court cases, here's a good one:
A family was away on vacation. A burglar tried breaking in through the garage and somehow got himself locked in the garage. He had to live off of dog food and Pepsi for a week, then turned around and sued the family for malnutrition...and won.
Do you have "actual factual" truth that those were real cases?
For one, I've heard soooo many variations of the RV story I'm a bit skeptical about it.
The other, I dunno. My aforementioned lawyer lady friend calls BS on a lot of those burglar stories, she says several of the rediculous lawsuit tales circulating around are urban legends of sorts.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: ipsd on March 29, 2007, 01:21:47 PM
I'm not blaming the lawyers. I think it is more of a lawmakers problem. If we had a Common sense law we wouldn't have to have all this . Come on people until the late 90's if you went some where and ordered coffee and it didn't get to you hot you would have complained and got some new coffee. But some judge thoght it was a good Idea to give some old lady some money for getting hot coffee that should be hot. Then he gave her a sh#t ton of money when she spilled her hot coffee that she ordered hot and would complain if it wasn't hot. What kind of shiznit it that. It is a place where no one is made to use common sense any more. That is the whole problem.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: JeremyB on March 29, 2007, 01:27:27 PM
Quote from: kingcars;137053
I remember hearing about a lawsuit where a guy driving an RV decided to put the cruise control on, then went to the back for some coffee. Needless to say, it got wrecked, and he sued the company....
...and won.
It's not as much the companies' fault for this, but more so for the dumbass people we have living in this world.
EDIT: While we're on the subject of dumb court cases, here's a good one:
A family was away on vacation. A burglar tried breaking in through the garage and somehow got himself locked in the garage. He had to live off of dog food and Pepsi for a week, then turned around and sued the family for malnutrition...and won.
O RLY?
http://www.snopes.com/legal/lawsuits.asp
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: EricCoolCats on March 29, 2007, 01:40:13 PM
A lot of this epidemic can be explained using simple math.
There are more people now in the U.S. than ever before (300 million+). Graduation rates are not great. Therefore, more dumb people are in this country now than ever before. The way people raise children is also highly questionable; this doesn't help matters. If things were great then TV shows like "Supernanny" wouldn't exist.
Like it or not, the uneducated exist in large numbers in the U.S. It really is no wonder that there are disclaimers everyone. They shouldn't be. However, until there is a mass installation of common sense across the population, things are likely to continue in a downward fashion.
Likewise, lawyers will do anything to find a loophole if it means a potential settlement in their favor. Their own codes of ethics could use a huge dose of common sense.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Jim_Miller on March 29, 2007, 01:46:29 PM
I love the towel dispensers in public bathrooms. You know the ones with the cloth towel that goes in a continuous loop. Those around here have a label on them warning you not to stick your head in the loop. I can only assume somebody must have done this at one time
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: daboss351 on March 29, 2007, 03:38:27 PM
I for one am a violation of those caution labels, half the time the label makes you wonder what would happen. Im smart enough not to do anything really dangerous, but its stupid people, that decide to do stupid things to amuse them selfs half the time. like the axe cans, i have so many moron friends who set each other on fire with them, hence why the label is there.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: stuntmannick on March 29, 2007, 03:49:12 PM
Quote from: Ether947;137057
They are just following the law. I would blame the lawyers before them.
I thought they were there to interpret the law, not follow it. That's our duty.
I still think this whole "stupidity" movement stems back to the judges/juries for allowing such cases to happen.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: blueovalford on March 29, 2007, 05:39:17 PM
Quote from: Jim_Miller;137073
I love the towel dispensers in public bathrooms. You know the ones with the cloth towel that goes in a continuous loop. Those around here have a label on them warning you not to stick your head in the loop. I can only assume somebody must have done this at one time
That's why some of them are there, because someone did it, they got sued, and don't want to get sued again. I forget who it was but a comedian did a thing on this and one of the things was there was instructions on the package of how to make pop-tarts. Makes you wonder.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Thunder Chicken on March 29, 2007, 08:15:46 PM
Quote from: stuntmannick;137093
I thought they were there to interpret the law, not follow it. That's our duty.
I still think this whole "stupidity" movement stems back to the judges/juries for allowing such cases to happen.
The lawyers for both sides are there to inform the jury of the law and how it applies to the plaintiff and defendant. Juries are not professional lawmakers and most do not have the foggiest idea of how courtrooms and the legal system operate. They supposedly also don't know who is the guilty party (or if any party is guilty) until they hear the case, as presented by lawyers and as advised by judges.
For example, the plaintiff's lawyer might bring a certain point about that is not relevant or some evidence that may be questionable (in its validity or in the way it was obtained). The defendant's lawyer will immediately object, and if the objection is reasonable the judge will reject the testimony or evidence and will instruct the jury to do so as well. The problem that arises is that although the judge may tell the jury to disregard evidence, the jury is full of common people, and once they've heard it it's hard to forget or disregard it. The lawyer that presented it to begin with knows full well that it'll be rejected, but he also knows it WILL influence the jury, whether it's rejected or not.
That's the problem with the jury system - you're relying on common people that may put more emphasis on compassion than law. They feel bad for the guy that got injured in the accident, so they make him rich.
That Snopes article actually presents some very good arguments both for and against tort reform. What I'd like to see is the so-called "punitive damages" awards (the very large cash sums awarded to plaintiffs when the defendant is found willfully negligent) going to charity instead of the defendant. That way the corporation is still punished, but the money might do some good. For example, if you break your neck by tripping in a Wal-Mart, and it's proven that Wal-Mart knew about that slippery floor for decades, and that many people have slipped on it and gotten injured but Wal-Mart didn't fix it, a punitive damage award should be made toward spinal injury research. That way the guy that broke his neck might someday walk again.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: slamedcat on March 29, 2007, 09:33:21 PM
Quote from: blueovalford;137116
I forget who it was but a comedian did a thing on this and one of the things was there was instructions on the package of how to make pop-tarts. Makes you wonder.
Brian Regan
3 sec to zap fry a pop tart its a classic.
Preperation H is another. "Do not take oraly". Who? What? Huh?
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: cougrrr302 on March 30, 2007, 12:58:51 AM
Quote from: kingcars;137053
EDIT: While we're on the subject of dumb court cases, here's a good one:
A family was away on vacation. A burglar tried breaking in through the garage and somehow got himself locked in the garage. He had to live off of dog food and Pepsi for a week, then turned around and sued the family for malnutrition...and won.
Reminds me of the movie Liar Liar. Where the old lady says: My friend had a burglar break in through the skylight, and fall and cut himself on a butchers knife. He sued her for $X,000 and won.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: koldhearted1 on April 02, 2007, 10:59:14 AM
cure for stupidity: find stupid person :beatyoass: till either incoherent or dead repeat as necessary.
warning: do not take this if you have to operate heavy machinery, drive short or long distances, walk and chew at the same time or any other situation that may require your immediate attention.
koldhearted enterprises not responsible for any results you may attain.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: 5.0willgo on April 02, 2007, 11:13:21 AM
Take a look at my avatar... We recieved a piece of equipment at work and stuck on every side was the warning label. It had this picture and another picture. The other picture had guys with the IBM logo on them meaning nobody buy IBM employees should move it.
Ron White said it best. You can't fix stupid.
My Tiburon has some funny labels on it. Let me tell you the back seat is not meant for full grown adults. Midgets yes, but the average adult, no. If you sit in the car with the hatch open you can clearly tell if it closes, it will hit you, yet they still put the label on. The picture shows the profile of the car with an adult sitting in the back with the hatch open. You can clearly see their head and top half of the body sticking out of the car. Between the persons head and the hatch is a red lightning bolt. It's hilarious.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: kingcars on April 02, 2007, 06:34:45 PM
Quote from: EricCoolCats;137068
The way people raise children is also highly questionable; this doesn't help matters.
Ya know whats funny? Soooo many of today's problems can be traced back to one thing: parenting. Media causing violence in children? Well, where the hell are the parents to either A) filter this stuff from their child/ren until they believe they're ready to see it or B) teach their child/ren right from wrong? Kids not graduating? Raise responsable children! If only more people with at least a minimal amount of maturity and brain capacity would raise children...
How many times do you go in public, see a small child do something stupid and/or act selfish or annoying, only for the parent to softly say "Ok now, [name], dont do that again." Or even the opposite end of that. One time I saw a small kid se his knee on the sidewalk and he cried (not loudly either) and his dad kept hitting him hard with a paint stirrer telling him to shut up. Parents like these are what's wrong with today's society.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Thunder Chicken on April 02, 2007, 09:01:45 PM
Quote from: kingcars;137855
How many times do you go in public, see a small child do something stupid and/or act selfish or annoying, only for the parent to softly say "Ok now, [name], dont do that again." Or even the opposite end of that. One time I saw a small kid se his knee on the sidewalk and he cried (not loudly either) and his dad kept hitting him hard with a paint stirrer telling him to shut up. Parents like these are what's wrong with today's society.
And there is the problem with kids: The lawmakers have decided that there is no acceptable way to punish a kid. It's not bad enough that a father or mother can't give a kid a proper whooping when they do something wrong (and I'm not talking about beating a kid for the sake of beating him), but now even the schools can't do a thing. If a kid fails, the parents sue the school. Schools, afraid of lawsuits, allow children to progress when they shouldn't.
A good example of how stupid it is: A friend of mine's father & mother have a nice hedge around their yard. They live near the seedier area of town. A single mother recently moved in, and her three kids have been terrorizing the neighbourhood ever since. They jump in and tear up the aforementioned hedges (as well as other neighbours' hedges), climb on people's cars, abuse local pets, the whole nine yards. My buddy's father has yelled at them, only to have obscenities hurled at him. They came back that night and tore his gate off the fence, right before his eyes. A neighbour has been videotaping the damage these kids are doing. The police have been called several times.
The police. Ya know what they said? "The kids are under 12, so we can't do anything at all". So these kids are free to terrorize the neighbourhood and the people can't do a thing about it. If they tried, THEY'D be charged. The mother of the kids is on welfare and has nothing, so she can't be sued for the damage her kids cause. And the police have spoken to her, but she claims she can't control the kids.
That's justice.
I keep telling these people to call Child Services. If that mother can't control her kids, and if she is allowing them to become criminals, she should lose 'em. Simple as that. I know that if those were MY hedges I'd have 'em strung with razor wire.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Cougar5.0 on April 02, 2007, 09:36:12 PM
I'm glad I have sensitive girls. I just holler at them and they start weeping. lol
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: daboss351 on April 02, 2007, 10:18:12 PM
so no one other then me has ever done what the labels have told you not to just to see what happens?
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: tbirdscott on April 03, 2007, 01:02:00 AM
Saw a nerf gun comercial earlier today, said on the bottom of the screen in tiny grey letters 'slow motion' no shiznit? I thought the dart would actually drift accross the room at a harmless 2kph...
The cure to save the world is to restrict medical services, and stop saving these idiots when they screw up, granted everyone gets hurt but c'mon! Today I was in emergency (screwdriver through the hand, yes it hurts like a mofookie) and the woman in the booth next to me was telling the doctor she had over 62 allergies, MS, arthritis, and lord knows what else. Worst part is she had her three kids with her which means that those poor genes are going to spread, they are going to breed with other people possibly of week body or mind then we have more messed up people, were going to breed our species into extinction. In the wild these people would have been killed or died before they could reproduce keeping the species strong. I know its a ****in cruel way of looking at it but does it not make sense?
I am NOT saying that the disabled or diseased shoul die, just saying that this is the cause of alot of problems and its only going to get worse till we no longer exist.
Scott
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Tbird232ci on April 03, 2007, 05:01:10 PM
The problem is, we have no natural predators. We are out own predators, and all of these labels and lawsuits are keeping the weak and stupid walking around.
Cruel? Yes. True? Yes.
Someone stupid enough to put a sealed bag over their head should suffocate. Someone who slips on a wet floor and breaks something should be hurt and pay. Someone who slams their head in the hatch should have a headache. Someone who burns themselves on fireworks should feel the burn.
Why is this? Its how we learn. Take the pain away, we never learn.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Cougar5.0 on April 03, 2007, 11:16:16 PM
Quote from: tbirdscott;137967
... Worst part is she had her three kids with her which means that those poor genes are going to spread, they are going to breed with other people possibly of week body or mind then we have more messed up people, were going to breed our species into extinction. In the wild these people would have been killed or died before they could reproduce keeping the species strong. I know its a ****in cruel way of looking at it but does it not make sense?
... Scott
I'll take weak people over compassionless jackasses any day. Who the **** made you the judge of others?
Are you God?
That was the single most assinine thing I have ever read on the internet.
Kill any cats today?
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: stuntmannick on April 04, 2007, 12:08:50 AM
I snuck a retard into a sperm bank...
Name that band
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: xr7cat on April 04, 2007, 01:13:59 AM
Quote from: tbirdscott;137967
Saw a nerf gun comercial earlier today, said on the bottom of the screen in tiny grey letters 'slow motion' no shiznit? I thought the dart would actually drift accross the room at a harmless 2kph...
The cure to save the world is to restrict medical services, and stop saving these idiots when they screw up, granted everyone gets hurt but c'mon! Today I was in emergency (screwdriver through the hand, yes it hurts like a mofookie) and the woman in the booth next to me was telling the doctor she had over 62 allergies, MS, arthritis, and lord knows what else. Worst part is she had her three kids with her which means that those poor genes are going to spread, they are going to breed with other people possibly of week body or mind then we have more messed up people, were going to breed our species into extinction. In the wild these people would have been killed or died before they could reproduce keeping the species strong. I know its a ****in cruel way of looking at it but does it not make sense?
I am NOT saying that the disabled or diseased shoul die, just saying that this is the cause of alot of problems and its only going to get worse till we no longer exist.
Scott
Totally agree that people if doing stupid things should suffer for it, and I also agree on direction we as a species is going, along with in the wild stuff. But what is one to do.
Though if we were to get rid of politicians first most problems would be solved, they need there own warning labels. It trickles down from them.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: tbirdscott on April 04, 2007, 02:28:51 AM
Quote from: Cougar5.0;138147
I'll take weak people over compassionless jackasses any day. Who the **** made you the judge of others?
Are you God?
That was the single most assinine thing I have ever read on the internet.
Kill any cats today?
I may be a jackass but atleast I can see whats happening to us.
Whats with the cats??
Scott
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Brypur on April 04, 2007, 05:08:26 AM
The problem is who writes the standards by which we choose what is good and what is bad? Ever hear of David Ring? He is a preacher that has battled a lot of in his life and you might well say why is he around. But hear him speak and you will be amazed. And his response to those that question him and his physical conditions? "I have cerebral palsy. So what's your problem?" For we all have a problem somewhere or another. And most of us have multiple problems. Does that mean we should die?
Albert Einstein. A genius of a man. But unable to function in society without assistance. Does that mean he should be killed off for he is the weak link socially? Or breed for he is the strong link mathametically.
Or how about Hitler? Breed him for he did a lot of good things for Germany. He rebuilt national pride. He rebuilt the country and economy to a good deal. Or kill him for he was bad for the world. He killed those he saw as inferior. He was a tyrant.
I believe there is a standard by which men can be judged. It is called the Bible. And what does it say? That GOD loves all men. Irregardless of their condition. But it also says we all deserve to die. For none of us are perfect. But GOD has provided a way of escape. We can choose to take it or not. And for me to say that a person should die just because they are weak in an area that I may be strong? I don't think so...because using that logic there would be a lot of people looking to throw my worthless hide away. And I kinda like being alive.
One other item to mention. Is it not the duty of the strong to protect the weak? Why do you think you are strong? Just to build up yourself or to help others that may need it? Perfect example is in the husband protecting his wife. For each have a duty and role to play and one of the husbands is to protect the house and all that is in it. Don't believe me? Just go next door to your neighbors house some night and try and clean him out. See what happens.
Bryan
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: 4thqtr on April 04, 2007, 03:34:20 PM
Quote from: tbirdscott;137967
Today I was in emergency (screwdriver through the hand, yes it hurts like a mofookie) and the woman in the booth next to me was telling the doctor she had over 62 allergies, MS, arthritis, and lord knows what else.
Wait, wait, wait. So you were sitting there with a screwdriver through YOUR hand and judging the survival fitness of another person? To be fair, she probably wasn't doing anything directly to get her allergies or MS. She was probably looking over at you, shaking her head and wondering how you managed to pull off your own injury. So who "screwed up"?
You cannot apply survival of the fittest to humans, and feel that the species is threatened by someone who has a "weak body or mind." Where would you be without vaccines? Are you telling me you've never taken any antibiotics or any other medications? How about the food that you consume that is fortified by vitamins and other essential nutrients? Without those things, no matter how "fit" you may be, your own probability of survival drops dramatically - you would have probably died in the wild. If you feel that we shouldn't help the "weaker" or "stupider" then logically we should do away with medicine as a whole.
When the next smallpox, Spanish flu or Bubonic plague threatens the population, you can bet humans won't just stand by a watch. We are not mice, dogs or anything else in nature. We are blessed in that we have medicine and science, which no other animal has. In many ways, humans are above nature - just take a look at artwork, music, movies, philosophy, education, etc. It is our duty to protect all individuals equally with the abilities given to us, as it is so stated in both of our governments.
Another point: there are no "good" or "bad" genes. Assigning such values is arbitrary at best. For example, those who inherit the Sickle Cell Trait are less susceptible to malaria. Now in North America where malaria is relatively rare, some would call this trait "bad," but in other parts of the world, this trait can be seen as "good." The bottom line is, some genes are selected for at different places or times, and they are neither good or bad.
About a hundred years ago, there were some who believed as you do in the consequences of Darwinian evolution in humans. They felt that the "lower class" population was outbreeding the "upper class" population, and thus, in a few generations the country would be overrun by vagrants, criminals, people of lower mental capacity, the weak and the sickly. There was actually a movement to pay "upper class" people to bear children, and there were programs in the Appalachian areas to sterilize individuals deemed mentally retarded. If this sounds eerily similar to the beliefs of the puppies regime, it is. Hitler studied this Eugenics movement in the United States, and also believed that he had the duty and the right to protect what he saw to be the ideal gene pool. Needless to say, he won't be remembered in history for doing humankind any favors.
Now i'm not saying there aren't a few head-scratchers out there in terms of warning labels. But what I am saying is that it's easy for us to sit here and judge other less fortunate people, and that is a mistake. Most people here are in good health, well-educated and have lots of life experience - and for that we are lucky. But you can't tell someone who has 62 allergies or whatever else disease that they shouldn't have kids. You can't let a 1 year old kid suffocate on a plastic bag when they don't know anything about anything. It's unfair to call someone weak and stupid and ignore them because they weren't fortunate enough to have access to the same healthcare, loving families and education that we were. It's over 100 years after the first Eugenic "thinkers" bitched and moaned about the decline of civilization, and we're still here kicking stronger than ever.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: stuntmannick on April 04, 2007, 04:33:34 PM
Quote from: 4thqtr;138270
and we're still here kicking stronger than ever.
Lol, now that is debatable.
But you are correct, we are still here.
P.S. What ever happened to personal responsibility?
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: Thunder Chicken on May 04, 2007, 09:35:04 AM
I believe we may have a new winner: Man sues laundromat for $65 million over lost pants (http://"http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/05/03/missing.pants.ap/index.html")
No, they're not the pants Elvis was found dead in. They're not the pants Jesus Christ was wearing at the last supper. They're just a normal pair of pants that the plaintiff thinks he's entitled to $65 million because they were lost. And they're not even lost - the pants were found a week later but the guy claims they're not his, so he wants his $65 million. And the worst of it is that the plaintiff is a judge himself, who should know better than making frivolous lawsuits like this. There's now a movement to have him removed from the bench over this idiocy
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: tireshredder on May 04, 2007, 10:33:52 AM
See, when we have stupid people like him a judges, of course other idiots will win frivilous cases.
Title: I know USA is a tort-friendly, lawyer- society, but...
Post by: jcassity on May 05, 2007, 01:20:21 AM
here ya go folks,,,,,,
99% of all lawyers make the rest look bad.:D
hummm,, as i sit here in my home drinking a cup of coffee, it occures to me that my cup does not warn me that the contents may be hot.
nor , while on the toilet,,did the inside of my underwear remind me with a label to wipe my butt before standing,,
and to date,, our lead atrorney general indicated that there is no "legal" definition to the word "illegal" at the federal level when he was questioned about illegal aliens. "lou dobbs tonight"