Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-28-2014, 11:28 AM
GenuineRisk's Avatar
GenuineRisk GenuineRisk is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
Whoever (the Owner?) made up the rules that a 9-year old girl be allowed to fire a fully automatic weapon is at fault.

The instructor was doing his job albeit poorly and the parents are obviously idiots. Hopefully they do the right thing and cease from breeding anymore future idiots.
According to authorities, no one is as fault because the place was licensed and operating legally. It was just one of those things. Like how the pregnant woman killed by her friend was just one of those things.

http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local...ille/13244051/
__________________
Gentlemen! We're burning daylight! Riders up! -Bill Murray
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 08-28-2014, 11:54 AM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk View Post
According to authorities, no one is as fault because the place was licensed and operating legally. It was just one of those things.
I'm sure the civil court will have something to say.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 08-28-2014, 12:00 PM
GenuineRisk's Avatar
GenuineRisk GenuineRisk is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
I'm sure the civil court will have something to say.
Civil cases are brought by private citizens. Who's going to sue? The dead man's family? It's the only ones I can see making sense, but I find it hard to believe a court will buy that the guy was pressured into this by his job, judging from his ammosexual history which is easily accessible on Facebook and which, I have no doubt, Burgers and Bullets has now saved to hard drives. Who else? The parents suing for their daughter's trauma seems a little crazy, as they were clearly complicit, seeing as how they videoed the thing.

Though this is America, where our motto is not "In God We Trust" so much as it is, "I'll Sue!". So, you never know. But it's not the state that brings civil cases, though they sometimes partner with private citizens. Usually that is in a case of civil rights violations, but I find it hard to believe there's any grounds for that here.
__________________
Gentlemen! We're burning daylight! Riders up! -Bill Murray
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 08-28-2014, 12:29 PM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk View Post
Who's going to sue? The dead man's family?.
Were the ones I was referring to
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 08-28-2014, 12:50 PM
GenuineRisk's Avatar
GenuineRisk GenuineRisk is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
Were the ones I was referring to
I just don't see how they'll have a case. How do you prove negligence when the facility was clearly adhering to state law? I mean, the thing is on video. If there's any negligence, it's personal negligence on the part of Vacca himself.

Best case, the state will tighten rules on age restrictions and weaponry at shooting ranges, but honestly, fat chance that'll happen; the NRA would have a fit. If a classroom full of dead 6-year-olds didn't change anything, one dead Gen-Xer isn't going to, either.
__________________
Gentlemen! We're burning daylight! Riders up! -Bill Murray
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 08-29-2014, 09:42 AM
dellinger63's Avatar
dellinger63 dellinger63 is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 10,072
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GenuineRisk View Post
I just don't see how they'll have a case. How do you prove negligence when the facility was clearly adhering to state law? I mean, the thing is on video. If there's any negligence, it's personal negligence on the part of Vacca himself.
Was McDonalds adhering to State law when they served hot coffee?

And wasn't it the woman who spilled the hot coffee on her crotch who was negligent?

You underestimate the ridiculousness of our civil court system.

Did Vacca provide the girl the gun? Buy the property where the gun range was on? Create the range's rules?

Or because Vacca was a gun enthusiast, he's the only one to blame?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 08-29-2014, 03:37 PM
GenuineRisk's Avatar
GenuineRisk GenuineRisk is offline
Atlantic City Race Course
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,986
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dellinger63 View Post
Was McDonalds adhering to State law when they served hot coffee?

And wasn't it the woman who spilled the hot coffee on her crotch who was negligent?

You underestimate the ridiculousness of our civil court system.
No, you just don't bother to google anything to make sure you know what you're talking about before you go off about it. Here are some actual facts about the McDonald's Hot Coffee case:

"McFact No. 1: For years, McDonald's had known they had a problem with the way they make their coffee - that their coffee was served much hotter (at least 20 degrees more so) than at other restaurants.

McFact No. 2: McDonald's knew its coffee sometimes caused serious injuries - more than 700 incidents of scalding coffee burns in the past decade have been settled by the Corporation - and yet they never so much as consulted a burn expert regarding the issue.

McFact No. 3: The woman involved in this infamous case suffered very serious injuries - third degree burns on her groin, thighs and buttocks that required skin grafts and a seven-day hospital stay.

McFact No. 4: The woman, an 81-year old former department store clerk who had never before filed suit against anyone, said she wouldn't have brought the lawsuit against McDonald's had the Corporation not dismissed her request for compensation for medical bills. I'll add, her initial request was for less than $10,000

McFact No. 5: A McDonald's quality assurance manager testified in the case that the Corporation was aware of the risk of serving dangerously hot coffee and had no plans to either turn down the heat or to post warning about the possibility of severe burns, even though most customers wouldn't think it was possible.

McFact No. 6: After careful deliberation, the jury found McDonald's was liable because the facts were overwhelmingly against the company. When it came to the punitive damages, the jury found that McDonald's had engaged in willful, reckless, malicious, or wanton conduct, and rendered a punitive damage award of 2.7 million dollars. (The equivalent of just two days of coffee sales, McDonalds Corporation generates revenues in excess of 1.3 million dollars daily from the sale of its coffee, selling 1 billion cups each year.)

McFact No. 7: On appeal, a judge lowered the award to $480,000, a fact not widely publicized in the media.

McFact No. 8: A report in Liability Week, September 29, 1997, indicated that Kathleen Gilliam, 73, suffered first degree burns when a cup of coffee spilled onto her lap. Reports also indicate that McDonald's consistently keeps its coffee at 185 degrees, still approximately 20 degrees hotter than at other restaurants. Third degree burns occur at this temperature in just two to seven seconds, requiring skin grafting, debridement and whirlpool treatments that cost tens of thousands of dollars and result in permanent disfigurement, extreme pain and disability to the victims for many months, and in some cases, years."

That, Dell, is how a business loses a civil case. There has to be a pattern of wanton recklessness and disregard for human safety. I just don't see how anyone proves that here. I mean, I have my own opinions about letting kids play with guns, but this place has not, as best I could tell, ever had a fatality or even serious injury.

Although I'm frustrated that untrue tropes get trotted out again and again (like the hot coffee one) I do highly recommend you watch the documentary "Hot Coffee" which is about civil lawsuits against companies and tort reform. I did a quick google search and it's currently available in its entirety on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tx7jAop3srA

It's very entertaining and very informative. It also comes down hard on our legal system, but not because people file frivolous suits.
__________________
Gentlemen! We're burning daylight! Riders up! -Bill Murray
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:48 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.