Stupid lawsuit of the week

**reason** · December 10th, 2004, 02:25 PM

There are no other excuses. Whether little johnny is hard to keep up with doesn't matter.

I think it matters to little johnny.

**reason** · December 10th, 2004, 02:34 PM

Yes, my previous life as a commercial lines underwriter is peeking through.

**jumper69** · December 10th, 2004, 02:37 PM

So lets hold the gun manufactuers liable for deaths caused by someone using one of their weapons.

Let's hold hair dryer makers liable because someone died while trying to dry their hair in the shower.

Let's hold automakers liable because a dumbass parent backed over their kid.

Let's hold everyone liable except the acutal person who had the case of the stupids.

In fact let's absolve everyone of any personal responsibility whatsoever. It'll never be my fault for anything I do ever again. Someone else should have figured out that I was a dumbass and designed that into their products so the blame for a tragedy can never be placed on me. [img]graemlins/whatever.gif[/img]

**reason** · December 10th, 2004, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by Jumper69:
So lets hold the gun manufactuers liable for deaths caused by someone using one of their weapons.

Let's hold hair dryer makers liable because someone died while trying to dry their hair in the shower.

Let's hold automakers liable because a dumbass parent backed over their kid.

Let's hold everyone liable except the acutal person who had the case of the stupids.

In fact let's absolve everyone of any personal responsibility whatsoever. It'll never be my fault for anything I do ever again. Someone else should have figured out that I was a dumbass and designed that into their products so the blame for a tragedy can never be placed on me. [img]graemlins/whatever.gif[/img]

A product should be designed so it can be safely used for the purpose for which it was intended while people are operating the product in the manner it was intended.

If the product cannot be used safely under reasonable circumstances, I think the manufacturer bears some liability.

That 150-200 people - mostly toddlers - lose their lives every year due to vehicles backing up, I question whether there is a design flaw that can and should be fixed...but isn't.

[ December 10, 2004 03:14 PM: Message edited by: reason ]

**gae** · December 10th, 2004, 02:59 PM

Jumper, I think you've already gotten your wish.

Product Warning Lables

**jumper69** · December 10th, 2004, 03:25 PM

And you KNOW those labels were developed because somebody actually DID what the labels say not to!!!

**reason** · December 10th, 2004, 06:52 PM

Originally posted by Jumper69:
And you KNOW those labels were developed because somebody actually DID what the labels say not to!!!

I'm sure companies spend a lot of time and money defending themselves against really, really stupid people and people who just want to make a buck - and slimey ambulance chasing lawyers. I'm also sure they also have to defend themselves against legitmate injuries from 2 year olds darting behind SUVs.

You can't weed out the good just because there's a lot of bad.

[ December 10, 2004 03:00 PM: Message edited by: reason ]

**reason** · December 10th, 2004, 06:59 PM

For example, one of the cases that led to more fireproof fabric involved a drunk driver who wrecked and died not from the impact but from the resulting fire.

While I absolutely do not condone drunken driving - and I understand the sentiment that the man got what he deserved - I fail to see what relevance this has with a vehicle becoming a fire trap upon impact.

Remember the exploding Pinto? So if the rear end collisions were caused by erratic stopping and starting by a drunken driver, then the faulty design would be ok? But not otherwise?

Doesn't make sense to me.