Reply With Quote
I'd imagine that whatever money you spent you might save on insurance premiums either way.
I just now saw what the other one looked like...and in no way, shape or form would I let my 6 year old go alone on that ride...I don't know if I'd let my 9 & 10 year olds go alone.
That one looks pretty dangerous.
I'd imagine that whatever money you spent you might save on insurance premiums either way.
Yeah, and the ignorant will get a big check from the insurance company to reward her stupidity. Just like winning the lottery. Whats wrong with this picture?
Oh, I decided to take T Park off ignore to read his takes.
If the manufacturer sold that product with no more safety requirements than a height restriction, such that a person could jump or fall out, then I'm guessing a law firm soon will own that company.
so if my son commits suicide, I can sue the gun maker for making the gun, the walmart for letting him buy it, and the condom company for making a faulty product that made me procreate in the first place?!?!?
Wow, parenting pays off, especially when you're a dumbass!
If they sold the gun to a six year old? Then sure you could sue walmart.so if my son commits suicide, I can sue the gun maker for making the gun, the walmart for letting him buy it, and the condom company for making a faulty product that made me procreate in the first place?!?!?
Wow, parenting pays off, especially when you're a dumbass!
More stupid analogies.
No.so if my son commits suicide, I can sue the gun maker for making the gun, the walmart for letting him buy it, and the condom company for making a faulty product that made me procreate in the first place?!?!?
Wow, parenting pays off, especially when you're a dumbass!
An intentional action is not comparable to an accident.
Cmon, buy a ing sense of humor, geez.
There aren't many clear thinkers in this country.
I was going to say, "in this world," but that's not true. I've been in places where a good 30% of the people think more clearly than I do.
What would a 6 year old be doing in a position to be alone at Walmart buying a gun? Where are his parents?
Translation: "Damn, I'm getting pwnt... need to backtrack and claim I was joking."
oh yeah thats it!
Ya'll people act like she's getting rewarded. She lost her child, that to me is the Hardest thing to live through.
Just hopefully she doesn't try to pin this on the business to get paid for being a dumbass.
She really doesn't deserve the big check. If I were dictator, the manufacturer, operator, and fair would all pay enormous fines that go to some children's charity.
First, I don't get the people trying to be cute or funny or 'own' someone in this thread. A child died a horrific death and dozens of people had to watch while it happened. This is not funny or humorous in the least.
Though I agree our society as a whole is far too litigous and the mother should not be rewarded for being a re , this lawsuit NEEDS to happen. Why? Because that is the only way will get done. There are laws all the time enforcing safety requirements that are common sense everyday- like seat belts for instance. How is this different? You know those ridiculous tags on your radio or hairdryer that say 'do not immerse in water'. DUH! Any idiot knows not to sumberge electronics in liquid- or do they? If EVERYONE knew that, then why the tags? Because somebody doesn't know.. or possibly many somebodys.
The people here who put only 1 or 2% of the blame on the operator are making this claim based on the assumption that sense is common. But it isn't. Individuals are smart, people are stupid. This lawsuit needs to happen to protect those who can't protect themselves because they are stupid. Or in this case, the innocent victims of stupidity. No, we can't regulate everything, nothing will ever be 100% safe. But this is a glaringly obvious case of a company playing the odds in order to save some money- and it backfired. Which would normally be no big deal, except a 6 yr old died as a result.
When I become ruler of the world, ES will be my right hand man.
Sorry, I will not accept a subservient role.
Ich will König sein.
I thought those tags are so morons can't sue companies for their stupidity. I'm sure the Ferris wheel had signs that read, "Please stay steated, keep hands in the gondola at all times, etc." But the kid was 6 and probably didn't know how to read, so the Mom should have accompanied him.
In my case for example, just because the new Power Wheels I bought my son says 1 year and up, doesn't mean I should trust the manufacturers instructions and think that my son is completely safe in it. If the battery blew up, then fine, I'd sue the company. But if my son stood up in the seat and fell and cracked his head open, it's my fault for leaving him unsupervised.
It's MY responsibility to be a parent, not companies or operator of Ferris Wheels. Maybe if the 6 year old got on without his Mom's permission, then I'd see why the operator would be to blame, since the Mom had no opportunity to accompany her son.
Here is the difference you completely have failed to grasp. You keep bringing up situations where the parent makes a purchase but is then the main party which supervises.
The Power Wheels you mentioned I'm sure have something in the instructions about parent supervision. The purchasing party is intended to be in charge of the equipment.
When you talk about the Ferris Wheel, the mother is NOT in charge of the equipment, operation or supervision. It is NOT the parents responsibility to make sure the situation is safe, but the ride owner and operators. Yes, the mother should have known that her six year old alone in that machine was unsafe, but so should the operator. And ultimately because the operator is in charge, it falls on them.
Legally, the operator is responsible for the ride and to make sure there are no unsafe situations that occour. There is no doubt in my mind that I woudl never let my six year old board anything like that without me there. Actually, I question whether I'd even let them board wth me on there. It looks unsafe as all ing . But the final responsibility in this case will fall on the owners and operators because they are the ones in charge of that ride, not the parents.
I usually agree with Manny...but not here. You claim that there are other things that aren't covered by the hight regulations, such as emotional maturity. Well, the only rule is height, the guy did his job, and as for emotional security...who will know better? The stupid ass mom, or the ride operator who has never met the kid, and sees 1000's go through his line every day. He does NOT have time to do an emotional I.Q test.
The blame it solely on the mother in this scenario. Sure, maybe things would be better if we had better laws regulating rides, but we don't so all talk in that regard is irrelevant. The autobahn has no speed limits, so would a cop be justified in arresting somebody who is driving 120 mph? Sure, anybody with any sanity can tell you that that speed is unsafe, but there are no regulations prohibiting that action. So no harm, no foul.
You can't expect a ride operator to do anything other than the job he/she is given. Don't take responsibility from who deserves it, the dumbass who knew the kid the best. His "mother".
Because falling and getting a boo-boo is the same as dying.
So when the kid boarded the ride, the mother was lifted of all parental responsibility? I'm just trying to completely understand you. What percentage of fault do you give the parent in this situation?
Cracked his head open = boo boo?
Are you SURE about that? Did you see these signs? See, cus signs like that would make sense. So would putting bars on the entrance to the gondola. But they didn't have the later, so what makes you think they would have the former?
I think you just proved my point. The mother NOR the worker should trust manufacturer's instructions because they are GUIDELINES. Common sense should kick in on BOTH their parts.doesn't mean I should trust the manufacturers instructions and think that my son is completely safe in it.
Since when does being a parent mean being responsible? So because a kid's parents are idiots, then no measures should be taken to protect them? They deserve to be scraped up off a parking lot pavement somewhere because their parents did not fulfill their moral obligation to be good parents? When the law can easily step in and make some VERY SIMPLE, VERY INEXPENSIVE safety requirements?It's MY responsibility to be a parent, not companies or operator of Ferris Wheels.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
