'30 Days'

[Dis]

this woman in question was actually on drugs. But they were prescribed drugs she was authorized to take. She didn't even get a ticket for killing 3 teenagers.

And she's not being sued. And she probably fell asleep at the wheel. Though that's not something anyone can prove.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Dissident
this woman in question was actually on drugs. But they were prescribed drugs she was authorized to take. She didn't even get a ticket for killing 3 teenagers.

And she's not being sued.

Did she take too many? Was she not supposed to drive when on the drugs. Or was it an unintended side effect of the drug?

Because the parents don't want to sue her (or her doctor for not telling her to stop driving while on the drug) doesn't mean she can't be.

Like I said, people are sued all the time for driving negligently and causing injury. I suggest you trust the guy who just graduated from law school on this one, Diss. One person not being sued doesn't lead to a general rule. Tort liability extends to reckless driving and always has.

[Boris Godunov]

Jesus H. Christ, Dissident, sometimes I can't tell if you're doing this intentially or you really are this ****ing stupid.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Jesus H. Christ, Dissident, sometimes I can't tell if you're doing this intentially or you really are this ****ing stupid.

doing what?

you think I'm ****ing lying. I don't like being called stupid.

she's not being sued. What more can I say. She may be sued in the future, but so far she's not. The family probably has no case because she wasn't even cited for a traffic violation. Just be glad you don't live in a ****ed up city like mine. We have the most unsafe streets in the nation (in my opinion at least)

[Imran Siddiqui]

you think I'm ****ing lying. I don't like being called stupid.

He's referring to:

Diss wrote this
We don't sue drivers that get in an accident with you and cause you to lose a leg.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dissident
doing what?

you think I'm ****ing lying. I don't like being called stupid.

she's not being sued. What more can I say. She may be sued in the future, but so far she's not. The family probably has no case because she wasn't even cited for a traffic violation. Just be glad you don't live in a ****ed up city like mine. We have the most unsafe streets in the nation (in my opinion at least)

First, provide a link to the story so we can get the real details. I'm not saying you're lying, just that you might not know what you're talking about (a strong possibility, given your track record).

Second, you're always making these specious extrapolations. You find one example and say it's proof something is always the same way. Every hear of an invalid extrapolation?

But what I really couldn't believe is you'd say something as stupid as "We don't sue drivers that get in an accident with you and cause you to lose a leg." This has to be one of the most absurd things I've ever seen you claim. Lawsuits over car accidents happen ALL THE DAMN TIME. Courts are replete with them.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


First, provide a link to the story so we can get the real details. I'm not saying you're lying, just that you might not know what you're talking about (a strong possibility, given your track record).

Second, you're always making these specious extrapolations. You find one example and say it's proof something is always the same way. Every hear of an invalid extrapolation?

But what I really couldn't believe is you'd say something as stupid as "We don't sue drivers that get in an accident with you and cause you to lose a leg." This has to be one of the most absurd things I've ever seen you claim. Lawsuits over car accidents happen ALL THE DAMN TIME. Courts are replete with them.

how can they sue someone if they did nothing wrong? The woman did not break any traffic rules. I'm sure lawsuits happen. But I doubt they go anywhere if they can't prove you were speeding or driving recklessly.

It's you guys who don't know the definition of an accident.

[Dis]

okay, I looked it up. It appears the family is filing a lawsuit. But I seriously doubt they will win. It was an accident after all. The family is also suing the bus company. I guess the bus company should make bus stops out of solid steel so people aren't killed in them. The family is also suing our entire county (we dont' really live in a city, but unincorporated town)

The family is also suing the doctor who prescribed the xanax.

and it appears I was wrong, becuase the police are recommending she be charged with speeding and failure to maintain a travel laine. Though she still hasn't be ticketed.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2005/Mar-31-Thu-2005/news/26189453.html

[Imran Siddiqui]

okay, I looked it up. It appears the family is filing a lawsuit.

and it appears I was wrong, becuase the police are recommending she be charged with speeding and failure to maintain a travel laine. Though she still hasn't be ticketed.

It's you guys who don't know the definition of an accident.

And negligence doesn't lead to accidents? People sue over car accidents all the time. A lot of accidents are because of negligence. Because someone wasn't paying attention or something.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dissident
how can they sue someone if they did nothing wrong?

You can sue someone for ANYTHING. I could march into court right now and file a lawsuit against you, claiming your posts give me migraines and stop me from sleeping. That doesn't mean it has merit, but it's still something I can do.

The woman did not break any traffic rules. I'm sure lawsuits happen. But I doubt they go anywhere if they can't prove you were speeding or driving recklessly.

Doesn't matter. My brother was involved in a bad car accident 2 years ago. An 18-year-old rear-ended him going 45 mph while he was stopped in traffic. The impact pushed my brother over the median, where he was hit by an oncoming car from the other direction.

Now, how does my brother (thankfully only minorly injured) recoup his losses? He sues the kid. But guess what the driver from the other lane does? He sues my brother. Wasn't my brother's fault at all, mind you.

It's you guys who don't know the definition of an accident.

No, we do. It's you who doesn't know the definition of "lawsuit."

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Dissident
okay, I looked it up. It appears the family is filing a lawsuit. But I seriously doubt they will win. It was an accident after all. The family is also suing the bus company. I guess the bus company should make bus stops out of solid steel so people aren't killed in them. The family is also suing our entire county (we dont' really live in a city, but unincorporated town)

The family is also suing the doctor who prescribed the xanax.

and it appears I was wrong, becuase the police are recommending she be charged with speeding and failure to maintain a travel laine. Though she still hasn't be ticketed.

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_ho.../26189453.html

Can you possibly see now why your assertions sans evidence are very problematic in arguments?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Now, how does my brother (thankfully only minorly injured) recoup his losses? He sues the kid. But guess what the driver from the other lane does? He sues my brother. Wasn't my brother's fault at all, mind you.

Yep... then your brother has to bring the 18 year old into the suit cause the teenager was the idiot driving negligently. The 18 year old SHOULD be sued in such a case. What, the guy just says, whatever, I'll pay for my own damages and forget about it? Don't think so.

Though I bet he brought your brother in just in case the lawyer for the 18 year old tries to pin it on your brother. If they sue your brother, they know that he'll bring in the 18 year old. If the guy didn't sue both your brother and the 18 year old in the original complaint.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

Now, how does my brother (thankfully only minorly injured) recoup his losses? He sues the kid. But guess what the driver from the other lane does? He sues my brother. Wasn't my brother's fault at all, mind you.

Yep... then your brother has to bring the 18 year old into the suit cause the teenager was the idiot driving negligently. The 18 year old SHOULD be sued in such a case. What, the guy just says, whatever, I'll pay for my own damages and forget about it? Don't think so.

That's what I was saying when I said "kid"--my brother sued the 18-year-old who rear-ended him (who, as it turns out, has no insurance, surprise surprise!). But the third person involved sued my brother (also because the kid had no insurance).

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
The problem isn't malpractice awards, it's unrestricted raising of premiums. Caps have not produced savings anywhere they've been tried . . except for the profits of the insurance companies.

I forgot who, but some Polytubbie posted in a different thread that the insurance companies have gone mad with premium increases is because they lost huge amounts of $$$ during the dot-com bubble. Something like that.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten

Dumping SS in favor of a nationalized health care system would be a better idea, but I don't see than being possible politically.

Agreed, against my better judgement. I don't like the idea of government funded health care, but our current system of (some) employer funded healthcare is puting us at a significant competitive disadvantage. Best of all would be people paying for their own insurance as offered by "insurance unions" structured similarly to credit unions. Customer owned non-profits.