RE: Mental Health

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: Mental Health

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Mental Health

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 8:59:15 AM

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

I can't answer your question, since I don't agree with your basic premise.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to HannahLynHeather)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 9:01:54 AM

HannahLynHeather

Posts: 2950
Joined: 4/4/2011
From: where it's at
Status: offline

What part do you disagree with?

_____________________________

clique? i don't need no stinking clique!

fuck a duck ~w. disney

My Twitter: http://twitter.com/HannahFuck

i hope you enjoyed the post, and as always my friends....have a nice day

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 9:21:46 AM

Posts: 9722
Joined: 2/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

LadyC, perhaps the number of civil suits in the US is not such a bad thing. Could it be that the US courts are just more accessible than in other countries? I am not saying that is the case, but that is a possibility. If so, how is that a bad thing?

Do you really think so? In most European countries you can also take somebody to court, only if you do lose, you're stuck with the court costs and legal fees and all the losses the other party encountered (loss of earnings, travel costs, same goes for witnesses), it tends to make people think a bit before they go on a wild mission of suing everybody and sundry. Then there are some instances where a few countries actually have the principle of "frivolous law suits" and will slap you with a fee for wasting the time of the court, which is also not a bad idea. Courts, judges and all that cost a fair bit and they're paid from taxes. Of course you can go and sue somebody for coughing and disturbing your sleep, if you are prepared to pay a fine for wasting the time of the court.

I've always been amazed at the amount of disclaimers, down to bottled water that proudly displays that the contents are cholesterol and fat free. That you shouldn't dry babies and pets in tumble dryers and microwaves... That washing machines are not meant to wash children and animals, ffs, who with half a brain would do that? See in most European countries if you use a device for something that isn't the purpose of the device, you can't go and sue the manufacturer, in the US if they don't put the disclaimer on, you can sue them. You are actually having a culture of ambulance chasers that's slowly swapping over to Europe and it's frightening.

Let's say if you are getting attacked or robbed in Europe or somebody violates your rights, of course you can sue, but it's not so much encouraged to sue just because you can and you hope to make a fortune. Here they simply assume that you buy a device for it's intended purpose, the purpose for which it is actually advertised, you don't need a disclaimer that it's not a good idea to insert your penis into a vacuum cleaner, that you should keep plastic bags away from toddlers and small children as they can put them over their heads and choke, they assume that a person with half a brain will be aware of it. How about all those ridiculous law suits that children listened to some pop or rock song and it made them kill themselves or others, so let's sue the artists?

Do a google for ridiculous lawsuits, which country do you think has them?

http://www.the-injury-lawyer-directory.com/ridiculous_lawsuits.html

http://www.oddee.com/item_96614.aspx

There is one case of the 80 year old guy who sued a women (she was 18 or 19) for discrimination (agism) because she didn't want to sleep with him and told him she considers him too old for her, happened in Germany, guess what, it was a big publicity stunt and never even got into a court room, he was told that the courts are busy enough without him trying to drum up business for his night club and they assume in his favour that it was caused by him being slightly demented, or else they'd be forced to give him a fine for contempt of court.

Now I might be biased here, but people who are allowed to get married, drive cars, vote and all that are responsible human beings and can be expected to use their brains, so I really wouldn't give them compensation for doing something blatantly stupid, just because the manufacturer underestimated the stupidity of people or their willingness to sue.

You know, in case my neighbours are regularly really loud and disturb my sleep, my first action would be to talk to them and politely ask them to turn the noise level down a bit, simple, innit? Now if they don't turn it down, I'd call the police or the city, noise violation. In the US I would possibly claim a trauma due to lack of sleep and sue them for compensation for my traumatic experience and of course the trauma my pets encountered....

_____________________________

There are 10 kinds of people who understand binary
Those who do and those who don't!

http://exdomme.blogspot.com/2012/07/public-service-announcement.html

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 9:47:01 AM

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

Well, first of all, your last paragraph is fairly exaggerated. I don't know of anywhere where the causes of action you describe wouldn't get thrown out of court. Most of what are deemed frivolous lawsuits in the media are filtered through someone else's bias. Perhaps if people read the pleadings and knew the evidence, not what some reported chooses to report, the lawsuit might not be frivolous at all.
I actually think the fact that it is typical for the losing party to get stuck with the costs, which you describe as typical in Europe, is not a good thing. I think it could chill someone from exercising their legal rights, and it certainly discourages settlement. I prefer free and open access to the courts, regardless of whether some might consider it frivolous.
As for the disclaimers, well yeah, you got me there. However, you can never underestimate how stupid some people are. Probably each and every disclaimer you mention was made in response to something someone actually did. Doesn't mean they have a cause of action for it, at least under the laws I am familiar with. It is certainly better than having manufacturers take short cuts that result in serious injury or loss of life to consumers using the products as intended. Remember the Ford Pinto? Unsafe at any speed.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to LadyConstanze)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 9:52:37 AM

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze

What floors me is, most countries are dead set against assisted suicide and will persecute the people who assisted - even though somebody might be terminally ill and in pain and wish to die - yet executions are acceptable? That's some fucked up logic.

There are other little things that baffle me. The usual, which still gets me, is that in areas where people are strongly Christian, there is also stronger support for the death penalty despite what (so I understand) is clearly stated in the Bible. Also amongst such strongly religious people, there's very little belief that someone who could have done a despicable crime like that of this child-murderer could have been 'demonically-possessed' at the time.

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to LadyConstanze)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 9:54:00 AM

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

I don't agree, Hannah, that we have established that the death penalty is murder and that the facade of legality has no meaning.
Having said that, I do have qualms about the death penalty, and I understand how some oppose it on moral grounds. Still, Wesley Alan Dodd? Where is the crime in killing some pedophile child killer if he has confessed, there is no question about his guilt, and he receives all the process to which he is entitled.
I also think the US is an unusually violent country, probably because of our obsession with guns. Maybe other countries don't need the death penalty. I generally support it here, especially now that DNA evidence can be used that makes it far more unlikely that an innocent person is wrongly executed.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to HannahLynHeather)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 9:59:35 AM

Posts: 19612
Joined: 9/27/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance
The only way to stop someone who regularly, brutally murders others, raped degrades then tortures their victims to death is not giving them three squares a day with tv the internet and a library. Im sorry but the people in prison whove broken laws shouldnt live better then I do, should regularly eat better then I do, and sure as hell shouldnt have better health care then me.

I must say, I'm always mystified by that kind of view of prisons. If they're so great inside, why don't more people deliberately try to get into them? Are you saying that you, personally, would be happy to live in prison?

_____________________________

http://www.domme-chronicles.com

(in reply to SpiritedRadiance)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 10:19:26 AM

Posts: 27124
Joined: 8/15/2005
From: Island Of Misfit Toys
Status: offline

I do "get" the notion that life in prison is not the solution for some. I will always be boggled that Charles Manson is alive and well and being paid for by California taxpayer dollars. Is he having a good life? Not by my estimation. He's having an *existence*. Still, wouldn't that money be better spent elswhere? 9mm rounds are cheap in comparison!

Sure, prisoners get fed, and they have a roof over their heads. Big deal. I can't imagine living under the kind of conditions that prison offers.

_____________________________

[page 23 girl]

(in reply to PeonForHer)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 10:21:47 AM

Posts: 32566
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
There are other little things that baffle me. The usual, which still gets me, is that in areas where people are strongly Christian, there is also stronger support for the death penalty despite what (so I understand) is clearly stated in the Bible. Also amongst such strongly religious people, there's very little belief that someone who could have done a despicable crime like that of this child-murderer could have been 'demonically-possessed' at the time.

Just taking a stab at this while waking up, so if it's confusing, just ask.

Not everyone sees the relation of anti-death penalty to scripture. The one that seems to get pulled out during such debates is that God is supposed to be the one who is to sit in judgment of a person's sins in life and we are supposed to forgive those who sin against us.

At the same time, there are various places throughout that specifically say that the laws of the land should be upheld. Even crucifixion wasn't stated to be "wrong" as a sentence. When the 'forgive them, for they know not what they do' bit came around, it can be seen as for the particular case of Christ being put to death. Crucifixion was normally the sentence for only the most vile offenders in the land, usually for murderers in particular.

_____________________________

The crowned Diva of Destruction. ~ ExT

Beach Ball Sized Lady Nuts. ~ TWD

Happily dating a new submissive. It's official. I've named him engie.

Please do not send me email here. Unless I know you, I will delete the email unread

(in reply to PeonForHer)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 10:29:25 AM

Posts: 27124
Joined: 8/15/2005
From: Island Of Misfit Toys
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather

quote:

are you seriously saying that where it's proved that someone has killed however many people and ripped apart god knows how many lives in the process that killing that person is bigger than the crime they committed?
no, not even fucking close.

quote:

wrong in the eyes of society
what society perceives things to be is of no fucking importance, an act is right or wrong in and of itself.

quote:

you kill a killer dog, being human is no better
if you're so fucking sure the person should die, do it yourself with your own hands. but to ritualize it and have the state do it in your name to absolve everybody of the guilt of their vengeance killing is the fucking obscenity.

society and the state are artificial constructs that only fucking exist in the collective imagination, they do not have the right to kill in revenge. it is the ultimate assault on the right of the individual, there is no higher crime than to assume the right to kill to the fucking collective without granting it to the members of that collective. if we, all together, can kill in revenge, then each of us individually can as well, you can't have it both ways, either we can or we can't.

Now I went back and read the thread!

I am not a believer in capital punishment MOST of the time. My exceptions are for the Dahmers and Mansons of the world, who continue to generate publicity long after they should. There is no kind of rehabilitation available for people of that type. They need to be separate from the rest of society, because they have irreparably broken the social contract.

That person who murdered the little boy needs to be far away from other people he could victimize. Permanently. End of story. Will that happen, or will he be able to milk the right of appeal forever and ever?

That fat woman is sad. I feel badly for her children. People are strange.

_____________________________

[page 23 girl]

(in reply to HannahLynHeather)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 10:34:37 AM

HannahLynHeather

Posts: 2950
Joined: 4/4/2011
From: where it's at
Status: offline

one of the definitions of murder is to kill or slaughter inhumanely or barbarously. how does that not apply to the death penalty?

The law is neither right or wrong, neither good or evil, it is a man made set of rules to govern human interaction. right/wrong & good/evil don't apply to the law, only legal/illegal. So, conversely, the law doesn't apply to questions of right/wrong & good /evil. there are good laws (no killing or raping) and there are evil laws (patriot act, enhanced interrogation).

Thus the death penalty is inhumane & barbarous killing, ergo murder. and when discussing a question of morality, of right and wrong, the issue of law has no bearing, because law does not concern itself with morality.

or do you still dispute these points?

_____________________________

clique? i don't need no stinking clique!

fuck a duck ~w. disney

My Twitter: http://twitter.com/HannahFuck

i hope you enjoyed the post, and as always my friends....have a nice day

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 10:44:26 AM

Posts: 9722
Joined: 2/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

I actually think the fact that it is typical for the losing party to get stuck with the costs, which you describe as typical in Europe, is not a good thing. I think it could chill someone from exercising their legal rights, and it certainly discourages settlement. I prefer free and open access to the courts, regardless of whether some might consider it frivolous.

As for the disclaimers, well yeah, you got me there. However, you can never underestimate how stupid some people are. Probably each and every disclaimer you mention was made in response to something someone actually did. Doesn't mean they have a cause of action for it, at least under the laws I am familiar with. It is certainly better than having manufacturers take short cuts that result in serious injury or loss of life to consumers using the products as intended. Remember the Ford Pinto? Unsafe at any speed.

Well, our opinions differ here, I think it's an excellent thing because it stops people from suing like mad for every fart, for some people suing seems to be some sort of hobby. So if somebody sues you over nothing, you are selfemployed and you can't deliver due to being saddled with a stupid and frivolous lawsuit, you lose income and customers, you would be happy about it? On top of it you would also be happy to pay for your legal representation and judges and courts cost quite a bit, so that's going to come out of your taxes. You think it's a good thing?

Look, in Europe if your finances are strained, you can get help if you want to sue somebody, they even pay your legal costs, but they will look at the evidence and if you don't have at least a decent chance for a case (because it really is a violation of your rights or anything like that), no way. We're not enduring injustice every hour of the day, that's what laws are for.

Example, about 2 years ago some idiot hurt my girlie dog, repeatedly, we tried to get away from him, I was close to smashing his face in, warned him several times to stop, he almost tore her hindleg out of the socket and she nipped him lightly, he went to the police and reported her as a dangerous dog, police spoke to all the witnesses, all said the guy had hurt the dog, was warned repeatedly, they checked the dog, found her very friendly and placid, told him to present some witnesses, he had none plus he was drunk when it happened, so they told him to sod off. He had the good grace to call the female officer who handled the case a stupid c*nt, so they got him for wasting police time and insulting a police officer. He was after compensation but to put a compensation claim in, you have to report a bite to the police first, since they decided that there was no case as he was just a stupid idiot, chances for a compensation claim went out of the window. I dread to think what it would have been like in the US...

Seriously, not having a disclaimer that you shouldn't wash children and pets in washing machines or dry them in tumble dryers or microwaves is not taking the short cut. If you are THAT stupid that you do that, you shouldn't be allowed to breed or own animals.

_____________________________

There are 10 kinds of people who understand binary
Those who do and those who don't!

http://exdomme.blogspot.com/2012/07/public-service-announcement.html

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 10:59:46 AM

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

I agree on your last point, except there is no way to stop someone from breeding, and not much to stop them from owning animals. Now that is a law I could stand behind.

If a lawsuit is truly frivolous, there are mechanisms in the court system to get it tossed out pretty early, and even get your costs. If it isn't truly frivolous, then yes, I think an open court system is a good thing.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to LadyConstanze)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 11:01:47 AM

Posts: 8998
Joined: 8/9/2007
Status: offline

I think this thread should no longer be considered casual banter.

I have read everyone's comments and I stand by mine.

No matter how immoral someone finds the concept of the death penalty, there is a difference between a law and a moral code.

If you live here, you abide by the legal laws; if you find something morally reprehensible, then talk to your congressman about it.

I think the example of suggesting the dead kid's parents should go out and shoot the killer is ludicrous. We do not have vigilantism, that is what these laws are in place for. To suggest otherwise is to suggest we go back to the wild, wild west.

If someone broke into your house and murdered your partner while they slept, you could choose to a: go out and get a gun and kill them and get arrested, tried, jailed or executed or b: they would be arrested, tried, jailed or executed.

I choose the latter simply because I choose not to go to jail, the laws are in place to take care of the matter.

Rebelling against laws that are voted into place by society is simply immature. Everyone is entitled to their personal views, but to say there should be no laws because it is immoral to kill is far too generalized a statement.

Are the laws always fair? No, of course not. Is justice always served? Of course not. Life is not fair, is it?

But this is what we have and if someone does not like it, they can leave or fight to have things changed.

< Message edited by sexyred1 -- 7/18/2011 11:02:54 AM >

(in reply to LadyConstanze)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 11:04:42 AM

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

Yes Hannah, I do. I disagree that the death penalty, in and of itself, is barbarous and inhumane. The Supreme Court agrees with me, and that is pretty much the last word on that subject in the good old U S of A (unless they change their mind).
Truthfully, though, this kind of debate is not worthwhile, because it never goes anywhere. I am not going to become an anti death penalty zealot, no matter what you say to me, and you obviously aren't going to change your mind either. It has to do with core beliefs, not any kind of logic on either side. Arguments about abortion are the same. As it happens, you are fortunate you live in a country where they don't have the death penalty, I feel I am fortunate to live here. Good enough for me.

< Message edited by Iamsemisweet -- 7/18/2011 11:29:49 AM >

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 11:22:35 AM

Posts: 3901
Status: offline

i do. i do so because the people who kill others don't do so humanely. they take great pleasure in the pain and suffering they cause. those people do not deserve the same consideration as the rest of the population. it doesn't mean my morals are bad for saying that person should die, that person deserves to die because they have no morals, they are inhumane, they have no empathy, guilt, remorse, shame or anything else. they are less than all the other animals on the planet and don't deserve to be treated better than those animals who would be killed for alot less if it involves a human. as i said, i'd go for injecting rather than anything else, if it's humane enough for any other animal it's humane enough for them.

i'm sick of paying for the scum. i'm sick of the fact that they are treated better than then others who deserve better. on average a prisoner gets double the food allowance of a child in school, an elderly person in care, in fact the government pays less than half what it costs to keep a prisoner per year to have an elderly person in care. prisons are piss easy, the only thing they don't have is space and the freedom to go where they want. i know this for a fact as i know several people who work in my town high security prision and my ex brother-in-law works in a low security prison. they do have tv's, wifi, liesure halls with pool tables and so on. it's gross that they are treated so well in the name of human rights. they get free education and gain degrees for free while my son gets sod all help and will have to work his arse off to pay for his. fuck that, you break the law you give up your rights that law abiding citizens should have instead.

the people who agree with cp are not the people with the lack of morals, the people who deserve to die for the attrocities they have done are. you can say what you like about my morals, but i know for a fact that they are just fine.

needles

(in reply to HannahLynHeather)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 11:30:28 AM

Posts: 3651
Joined: 4/9/2011
From: The Great Northwest, USA
Status: offline

Just edited my last post, since I realize it said the opposite of what I meant.

_____________________________

Alice: But I don't want to go among mad people.
The Cat: Oh, you can't help that. We're all mad here. I'm mad. You're mad.
Alice: How do you know I'm mad?
The Cat: You must be. Or you wouldn't have come here.

(in reply to needlesandpins)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 11:37:45 AM

Posts: 26123
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyConstanze

quote:

ORIGINAL: HannahLynHeather

i do not have the right to kill somebody no matter what they did unless i am actively defending myself or another person. therefore, the collective "us" doesn't either. the death penalty is not used to defend anybody, the crime has been done, so it is purely for vengeance. and thus not covered by the above limitation to the prohibition on killing.

That's basically most of my issue with capital punishment, if there are laws that say killing is wrong, then it is wrong, no matter how much somebody does deserve to be killed. Now killing somebody because that person has killed, that makes the executioner (the state in this case) as morally bankrupt as the person who committed the crimes. A legal execution is still murder, no matter how much the person deserves it, I understand the desire to see such a person dead, I'd possibly would feel the same way if a family member or a friend would get killed, still doesn't make it right.

Apart from the fact that capital punishment seems to be a lot milder than being locked up for the rest of your life. If I had the choice between sitting in a small cell for the rest of my life or getting a quick end, the quick end seems to be preferable.

What floors me is, most countries are dead set against assisted suicide and will persecute the people who assisted - even though somebody might be terminally ill and in pain and wish to die - yet executions are acceptable? That's some fucked up logic.

This.

Morally, personally, I have no problem with 'assisted death'. Whether it be for medical reasons, or as in the case of Jeff Dahmer who said something like "You should kill me because I deserve it and don't wish to continue living." He knew if freed, he would kill again and that he had nothing of value to offer society.

My problem, in addition to what the two above quoted posters have written, is that little 'what if'. If a person is found, after a period of time, to have NOT committed the crime, you can not make them UN-dead.

_____________________________

My twisted, self deprecating, sense of humour, finds alot to laugh about, in your lack of one!

Just because you are well educated, articulate, and can use big, fancy words, properly........does not mean you are right!

(in reply to LadyConstanze)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 12:55:05 PM

Posts: 9722
Joined: 2/18/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: LadyHibiscus

Now I went back and read the thread!

I am not a believer in capital punishment MOST of the time. My exceptions are for the Dahmers and Mansons of the world, who continue to generate publicity long after they should. There is no kind of rehabilitation available for people of that type. They need to be separate from the rest of society, because they have irreparably broken the social contract.

Don't you think that Manson as a sad old man being locked up most of his life in a tiny prison cell is much more of detergent than if he would have died young, relatively good looking and charismatic?
Same thing with all the celebs that died young, who would drool over Marylin Monroe and James Dean if they would have aged? Same principle, only the idea of spending your life in prison is more scary for most people than a quick death.

For the ones who claim what a nice life they have in prison, I can only imagine how horrible their own lives must be if they think it's great to be locked up in a small cell, knowing that those 4 narrow walls, zero privacy, almost no human interaction and never ever being able to just go anywhere, not even for a stroll down the shop to buy papers, I mean if they think it's so great, they can always try to rob a bank and just end in prison for a year or two, and then extend if they think it is really that great.

As for the costs, well, execution is cheap then? The legal costs and executing the execution is actually a lot more expensive than keeping somebody behind bars.

There's a reason why almost every civilized society doesn't have the capital punishment anymore, for those who want to go back to the dark ages, well, there's always China and a couple of Muslim countries, nobody stopping them from living there and to enjoy lack of human rights and all that.

_____________________________

There are 10 kinds of people who understand binary
Those who do and those who don't!

http://exdomme.blogspot.com/2012/07/public-service-announcement.html

(in reply to LadyHibiscus)

RE: Mental Health - 7/18/2011 2:56:40 PM

Posts: 7683
Joined: 5/2/2007
From: Northern New Jersey
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Iamsemisweet

Well, first of all, your last paragraph is fairly exaggerated. I don't know of anywhere where the causes of action you describe wouldn't get thrown out of court. Most of what are deemed frivolous lawsuits in the media are filtered through someone else's bias. Perhaps if people read the pleadings and knew the evidence, not what some reported chooses to report, the lawsuit might not be frivolous at all.
I actually think the fact that it is typical for the losing party to get stuck with the costs, which you describe as typical in Europe, is not a good thing. I think it could chill someone from exercising their legal rights, and it certainly discourages settlement. I prefer free and open access to the courts, regardless of whether some might consider it frivolous.
As for the disclaimers, well yeah, you got me there. However, you can never underestimate how stupid some people are. Probably each and every disclaimer you mention was made in response to something someone actually did. Doesn't mean they have a cause of action for it, at least under the laws I am familiar with. It is certainly better than having manufacturers take short cuts that result in serious injury or loss of life to consumers using the products as intended. Remember the Ford Pinto? Unsafe at any speed.

Very well put. I'm sure most people remember the old lady and McDonald's case, and think the silly old bitch should have known not to put it between their legs. They know very little of the details of that case. It wasn't a personal injury case, it was a liability case. When that case was over, it came to light that McDonald's kept their coffee at more than TWICE the temperature recommended for safe handling. The only reason they did that, was they felt it would keep them from having to make fresh coffee as often.

So essentially, LC, you are saying this woman's case would have been considered "frivolous," yet the facts that actually existed showed wrong doing on the part of McDonald's. The health and safety of the US advances because someone filed suit. Granted this is not the best case to talk about the forced advancement of safety issues, but it is internationally known, so used to make a point.

We do have a very litigious nation, I dont' think anyone here who knows anything about our legal system could deny that with a straight face. However, the alternative (which you seem to live in) is that people may *know* that what occured to them is wrong, but proving it won't be easy. So take the easy way out and say "it sucks, but I have to live with it."

Personally, I try not to live my life that way. If I can change the system, I will (I have). I have had no problem telling someone getting a divorce who wanted to make a big deal out the ex's new partner being around the kids, "unless the kids are present in the room when they are having sex, or the new person is physically damaging the kids, your dislike of them is irrelevant. Get over it." (yep, I am just as blunt face to face).

LC, you wondered why our system is the best? Yes, it takes longer for the FDA to approve drugs here, but you know what, they know all they can about potential dangers before releasing them to the public. Yes, we have a litigious population, but we also have caused companies to make drastic changes to their systems or policies because sometimes ONE person was brave enough to take on that system

Our system is better because of that. Because ONE brave person has the right to seek justice for a way they were wronged, and our system decided he has the right to be heard. Kind of why we left the UK so long ago to begin with, isn't it? Freedom. No country in the world is as free as we are. If they are, why the hell does everyone struggle to come here?

(in reply to Iamsemisweet)

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Mental Health

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.838