logo Sign In

The Things We Hate And Love Thread . — Page 2

Author
Time
Post link
I agree.

Wasps, definetly wasps, especially at picnics.
gtfo
Author
Time
Post link
Sueing abuse. Like that idiot who sued fast food saying there food made him fat. Or a burglur sueing a house of a family who he broke into for cutting himself in there house. Married with Children had an excellent mock of this situation with Al clobering a burglur and him trying to sue Al.

Al - He broke into my house so I broke into his face
Burglar - My life is in shambles I am now afraid to break into peoples houses anymore

Really some kind of sueing limit needs to be placed.
Author
Time
Post link
the burglar sued the owner of the house? Why wasn't he arrested for invading property the moment he claimed the suing?? I mean he confessed he did it, and he showed a proof of it! Sounds too much like an urban legend, it can't happen.

From my old stand up routine (sounded better in portuguese):

"I decided to sue myself one day I was bored. To defend myself, I told the judge I was clinically insane. I can't remember who won, but I know it was me. The lawyers kept everything, that is, nothing that all. Now that I think about it, I don't even think that really happened."
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
As the law stands, it is possible to sue the owner of a house you are breaking into under 2 circumstances: (1) if the homeowner used excessive force to disarm you; and (2) if the homeowner has booby-trapped the house.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
(2) if the homeowner has booby-trapped the house.


LOL!
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
As the law stands, it is possible to sue the owner of a house you are breaking into under 2 circumstances: (1) if the homeowner used excessive force to disarm you; and (2) if the homeowner has booby-trapped the house.

Yep, it's the truth. And it's sad. I don't see why I, as a homeowner, must limit how much ass kicking I lay down on a B&E bastard when he's in my house without me saying so. He's there and I don't know what he's capable of. I'm not going to interview the prick before I commence with a fight to find out if he's a black belt in Kenpo or carrying hidden weapons on his person to justify what I'm about to do to him. That's just pathetic.
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
(2) if the homeowner has booby-trapped the house.



LOL. Sounds like it should be called the Kevin McCallister defense.

4

Author
Time
Post link
So Joe and Daniel should be able to sue the hell out of that little brat, eh?
"You fell victim to one of the classic blunders, the most famous of which is 'Never get involved in a land war in Asia'."
--Vizzini (Wallace Shawn), The Princess Bride
-------------------------
Kevin A
Webmaster/Primary Cynic
kapgar.typepad.com
kapgar.com
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Bossk
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
As the law stands, it is possible to sue the owner of a house you are breaking into under 2 circumstances: (1) if the homeowner used excessive force to disarm you; and (2) if the homeowner has booby-trapped the house.

Yep, it's the truth. And it's sad. I don't see why I, as a homeowner, must limit how much ass kicking I lay down on a B&E bastard when he's in my house without me saying so. He's there and I don't know what he's capable of. I'm not going to interview the prick before I commence with a fight to find out if he's a black belt in Kenpo or carrying hidden weapons on his person to justify what I'm about to do to him. That's just pathetic.


Totally agree the law is insane. You should be allowed to do whatever you want to someone who breaks in your house against your will. Including killing them without a second thought. A crook sueing is rediculus. I take the attitude "He broke into my house so I broke into his face" the fact that this could really happen made that episode all that much funnier. One of my favorite episodes of the show. That should be another thing I hate

Stupid laws
Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Bossk
So Joe and Daniel should be able to sue the hell out of that little brat, eh?


More or less.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
But the thing is, if the burglar tried to sue the owner of the house, he is giving proofs that he commited a crime, and therefore he should be arrested. It's like stealing a car, crashing it on a wall, and suing general motors because the breaks didn't work.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Keep in mind that when we're talking about suing here, we're talking about personal injury cases. It is still possible to make a case for contributory negligence, which could reduce any award the burglar would receive to near zero.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: GundarkHunter
Keep in mind that when we're talking about suing here, we're talking about personal injury cases. It is still possible to make a case for contributory negligence, which could reduce any award the burglar would receive to near zero.


But wouldn't he also get arrested? I mean, he is delivering evidence that he commited a crime.
“Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” — Nazi Reich Marshal Hermann Goering
Author
Time
Post link
Yes, but the case would be tried separately, and there are laws that prevent evidence from one case from being used in a criminal case to incriminate the perpetrator.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
so techinically, if I went and burgled a place, and in doing so felll through their skylight., I could sue them for not putting a sign warning not to step on he skylight? They owuldn't be allowed to sue me for being on their roof either could they, since that would be my evidence.....

My head hurts.
gtfo
Author
Time
Post link
It's a question of whether the reasonable person would have stepped on the skylight. That's the standard used in personal injury suits.

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.

Author
Time
Post link
Originally posted by: Skipper
so techinically, if I went and burgled a place, and in doing so felll through their skylight., I could sue them for not putting a sign warning not to step on he skylight? They owuldn't be allowed to sue me for being on their roof either could they, since that would be my evidence.....

My head hurts.


Its not that simple because most judges have commen sense. You need a judge with no logic or commen sense at all. A Loyd Christmas of a judge to sue for that.
Author
Time
Post link
It is, isn't it? There was a long treatise on the "reasonable person." I might have to post it.
Here it is:
[A] mythical creature of the law whose conduct is the standard by which the Courts measure the conduct of all other persons and find it to be proper or improper in particular circumstances as they may exist from time to time. He is not an extraordinary or unusual creature; he is not superhuman; he is not required to display the highest skill of which anyone is capable; he is not a genius who can perform uncommon feats, nor is he possessed of unusual powers of foresight. He is a person of normal intelligence who makes prudence a guide to his conduct. He does nothing that a prudent man would not do and does not omit to do anything a prudent man would do. He acts in accord with general and approved practice. His conduct is guided by considerations which ordinarily regulate the conduct of human affairs. His conduct is the standard "adopted in the community by persons of ordinary intelligence and prudence.

Here's a cartoon:
http://www.yubanet.com/artman/uploads/scalia.gif

Princess Leia: I happen to like nice men.
Han Solo: I'm a nice man.