If Our Grandparents Could See Us Now

SilverEagle · February 23, 2010

Another great article by Ed Wallace.

http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/02/19/1981953/if-our-grandparents-could-see.html

FirefightnRick · February 23, 2010

I heard this guy interviewed on Medved today who I thought had an interesting message. He's got a new book out called "Life Without Lawyers". He explains why it is that you may see a label on a baby stroller today that reads "Remove child before folding stroller", and explains how the legal system has choked down the American business/inventing spirit.

Here's an 18 minute video of him.

Philip K. Howard: Four ways to fix a broken legal system.

Rick

UNT90 · February 23, 2010

I heard this guy interviewed on Medved today who I thought had an interesting message. He's got a new book out called "Life Without Lawyers". He explains why it is that you may see a label on a baby stroller today that reads "Remove child before folding stroller", and explains how the legal system has choked down the American business/inventing spirit.

Here's an 18 minute video of him.

Philip K. Howard: Four ways to fix a broken legal system.

Rick

Everyone hates attorneys...

Until they need one.

eeally · February 23, 2010

The problem does not lie in our lawyers but in the fact that our education system is broke.....If juries did not put it to companies then we would not be subject the silly things laywers make us think we need....

Quoner · February 23, 2010

The problem does not lie in our lawyers but in the fact that our education system is broke.....If juries did not put it to companies then we would not be subject the silly things laywers make us think we need....

Seams fine to I.

FirefightnRick · February 24, 2010

Dallas police officer's family sues Clinton

http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/02/23/1990394/family-of-officer-killed-in-clinton.html

See what I mean? This family more than likely didn't even

fathom for one second of sueing anyone until some "Slip and Fall"

lawyer can knocking.

Rick

KRAM1 · February 24, 2010

Dallas police officer's family sues Clinton

http://www.star-tele...in-clinton.html

See what I mean? This family more than likely didn't even
fathom for one second of sueing anyone until some "Slip and Fall"
lawyer can knocking.

Rick

This lawsuit does bother me. I do not understand how they would have standing to sue and why one can sue over this sort of thing. I think these sort of cases are part of the reason why many have such low opinions of trial lawyers. Sure, when you need a lawyer, you need to find a good one. But, I recall when it was not ethical for lawyers to advertise. Seems that the profession of law has really developed into a retail business these days. Maybe it's the fact that (not withstanding the need for the UNT law school) that there are simply too many lawyers and there are hundreds more graduating each year. Ever check the Denton phone book and check out the number of lawyers "practicing" in Denton?

Seems the profession, in some areas such as trial lawyers, have long ago stopped seeking justice and simply head for the biggest payoff where ever they can find it or make it. They simply seem to be in the profession to take care of themselves...clients are just a means to an end it seems to me. Too bad.

It seems the trial lawyers have really given the rest of the profession a very bad name. We work with some very fine corporate attorneys here at our office when we need them for trademark infringement issues, tax issues, etc., etc. They are VERY professional, provide a great service at a decent fee and give us great advice. Their aim does not seem to be to sure everybody nor to seek the harshest course of action. Seems to me that is what REAL and professional attorneys do for their clients.

UNT90 · February 24, 2010

Dallas police officer's family sues Clinton

http://www.star-tele...in-clinton.html

See what I mean? This family more than likely didn't even
fathom for one second of sueing anyone until some "Slip and Fall"
lawyer can knocking.

Rick

Ya, and the nerve of those people in Southlake, whose family members, no doubt, will be suing Toyota in the coming year because thier entire family was killed by the accelerating car that they had taken to the dealer several times to complain about... unexplained acceleration, only to be laughed out of the dealership.

Oh, and the President of Toyota America testifies that he brought the issue up to his superiors at the company, who told him it was a finanacial issue and that they just chose to ignore it, hoping there would be no claims.

Yep, no need for lawyers there.

It's kind of like there is no need for firemen. Everyone knows all they do is hang around the firehouse, practicing thier cooking, working out, watching TV, typing on GMG.com... Until there is a fire.

Here is an idea. Let's debate the whole spilled coffee in lap McDonalds case all over again.

All cases are fact specific, and you don't know the facts in any of them.

FirefightnRick · February 25, 2010

Ya, and the nerve of those people in Southlake, whose family members, no doubt, will be suing Toyota in the coming year because thier entire family was killed by the accelerating car that they had taken to the dealer several times to complain about... unexplained acceleration, only to be laughed out of the dealership.

Oh, and the President of Toyota America testifies that he brought the issue up to his superiors at the company, who told him it was a finanacial issue and that they just chose to ignore it, hoping there would be no claims.

Yep, no need for lawyers there.

It's kind of like there is no need for firemen. Everyone knows all they do is hang around the firehouse, practicing thier cooking, working out, watching TV, typing on GMG.com... Until there is a fire.

Here is an idea. Let's debate the whole spilled coffee in lap McDonalds case all over again.

All cases are fact specific, and you don't know the facts in any of them.

That may be the worse comparison I've ever seen. Emergency workers don't go out and create the emergency. They solve them without

demanding 40% of the take in return. :lol:

But in regards to Toyota's situation:

http://stossel.blogs.foxbusiness.com/2010/02/24/the-parasite-circuit/

The scare-of-the-day is always used by politicians to grab power. But to put the Toyota problem in perspective, before all the media hype, 19 fatal accidents were linked to faulty gas pedals and floor mats over the last decade. That's fewer than 2 each year. Compare that to America’s 40,000 annual fatal car crashes

Edited February 25, 2010 by FirefightnRick

hickoryhouse · February 25, 2010

Dallas police officer's family sues Clinton

http://www.star-telegram.com/2010/02/23/1990394/family-of-officer-killed-in-clinton.html

See what I mean? This family more than likely didn't even
fathom for one second of sueing anyone until some "Slip and Fall"
lawyer can knocking.

Rick

just to throw a cog I. The whole thing......

Democratic senators want to keep Toyota in question to boost gm sales thanks to UAW contributions?!?!?!?

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/UAWs-invisible-hand-behind-the-Toyota-hearing-going-on-right-now-85208332.html

UNT90 · February 25, 2010

That may be the worse comparison I've ever seen. Emergency workers don't go out and create the emergency. They solve them without
demanding 40% of the take in return.

But in regards to Toyota's situation:

http://stossel.blogs...rasite-circuit/

Your right. It's not important that Toyota chose to disregard the problem, which they knew existed. After all, only 19 people died. Not important at all. Unless your wife or kids were part of that 19. Then I bet it becomes pretty important. What if it were your wife and kids that had died in that Southlake accident? What would you have done?

In case you didn't know, Toyota refused to fix the problem because they felt it would be cheaper to settle the lawsuits that resulted from the deaths than recall the vehicles. It's called risk management.

Yes, attorneys in this type of case get 40% of the settlement, and justifably so. Know how much they get if they lose or there is no settlement? A big fat $0. I wonder if you would agree to get payed by the number of dispatched calls you get everyday and how you performed on those calls (how long did the fire burn, did anyone die, was anyone saved).

Better yet, let's eliminated employment attorneys. Yep, no FWFD Fire Assc. attorneys to fight any unjust discipline you may receive from FWFD.

I wonder if you would feel the same way if you had pulled the 4 bodies from the pond in Southlake.

Edited February 25, 2010 by UNT90

untbowler · February 25, 2010

Your right. It's not important that Toyota chose to disregard the problem, which they knew existed. After all, only 19 people died. Not important at all. Unless your wife or kids were part of that 19. Then I bet it becomes pretty important. What if it were your wife and kids that had died in that Southlake accident? What would you have done?

In case you didn't know, Toyota refused to fix the problem because they felt it would be cheaper to settle the lawsuits that resulted from the deaths than recall the vehicles. It's called risk management.

Yes, attorneys in this type of case get 40% of the settlement, and justifably so. Know how much they get if they lose or there is no settlement? A big fat $0. I wonder if you would agree to get payed by the number of dispatched calls you get everyday and how you performed on those calls (how long did the fire burn, did anyone die, was anyone saved).

Better yet, let's eliminated employment attorneys. Yep, no FWFD Fire Assc. attorneys to fight any unjust discipline you may receive from FWFD.

I wonder if you would feel the same way if you had pulled the 4 bodies from the pond in Southlake.

So how many deaths have occurred due to GM non-recalls, remember all the Ford Roll-overs? GM and the Gov't should not cast stones when their own house is dirty.

UNT90 · February 25, 2010

So how many deaths have occurred due to GM non-recalls, remember all the Ford Roll-overs? GM and the Gov't should not cast stones when their own house is dirty.

This is a debate about having the right of representation, not about which car industries are good or bad. If someone felt they had a claim against these other auto firms, by all means pursue it.

Let's not cloud the issue.

FirefightnRick · February 25, 2010

Your right. It's not important that Toyota chose to disregard the problem, which they knew existed. After all, only 19 people died. Not important at all. Unless your wife or kids were part of that 19. Then I bet it becomes pretty important. What if it were your wife and kids that had died in that Southlake accident? What would you have done?

In case you didn't know, Toyota refused to fix the problem because they felt it would be cheaper to settle the lawsuits that resulted from the deaths than recall the vehicles. It's called risk management.

Yes, attorneys in this type of case get 40% of the settlement, and justifably so. Know how much they get if they lose or there is no settlement? A big fat $0. I wonder if you would agree to get payed by the number of dispatched calls you get everyday and how you performed on those calls (how long did the fire burn, did anyone die, was anyone saved).

Better yet, let's eliminated employment attorneys. Yep, no FWFD Fire Assc. attorneys to fight any unjust discipline you may receive from FWFD.

I wonder if you would feel the same way if you had pulled the 4 bodies from the pond in Southlake.

Where are the facts you state in the Southlake case? And isn't it interesting that countless service department agents being interviewed around the DFW metroplex and the nation on the news and in the newspapers saying they hadn't had one single complaint until this can of worms opened up?

And by your support of the "Slip n Falls", I assume you are against Tort Reform, right?

Rick

Edited February 25, 2010 by FirefightnRick

UNT90 · February 25, 2010

Nope. All for Tort Reform, as long as gross negligence is not capped.

There has to be consequences for improper behavior that cause injury and loss of life, whether you are an individual or a company.

Apparently you don't get fact specific. That means each incident that caused deaths in the Toyota case have to be looked at and examined individually to see what facts are specific to those cases. Maybe they aren't all Toyota's fault, maybe they are. Without complete knowledge of all the facts, you can't just scream "lawyers suck" and bury your head in the sand.

Are there frivilous law suits? Of course there are. Are all lawsuits frivilous? Of course they are not.

Many look frivilous upon reading the headlines, but then when you look further, you find that the specific facts involved in that specific incident make the case anything but frivilous, like the McDonalds Coffee case.

When you come on here trying to denegrate an entire profession just to make a point, you really do come off as a guy who is just regurgitating what he hears on talk radio, and I'm on your side of the political spectrum.

And no, I'm not an attorney.

BeanCounterGrad'03 · February 25, 2010

Nope. All for Tort Reform, as long as gross negligence is not capped.

There has to be consequences for improper behavior that cause injury and loss of life, whether you are an individual or a company.

Apparently you don't get fact specific. That means each incident that caused deaths in the Toyota case have to be looked at and examined individually to see what facts are specific to those cases. Maybe they aren't all Toyota's fault, maybe they are. Without complete knowledge of all the facts, you can't just scream "lawyers suck" and bury your head in the sand.

Are there frivilous law suits? Of course there are. Are all lawsuits frivilous? Of course they are not.

Many look frivilous upon reading the headlines, but then when you look further, you find that the specific facts involved in that specific incident make the case anything but frivilous, like the McDonalds Coffee case.

When you come on here trying to denegrate an entire profession just to make a point, you really do come off as a guy who is just regurgitating what he hears on talk radio, and I'm on your side of the political spectrum.

And no, I'm not an attorney.

I wish I could give more than just 1 point for this post.

FirefightnRick · February 25, 2010

Nope. All for Tort Reform, as long as gross negligence is not capped.

There has to be consequences for improper behavior that cause injury and loss of life, whether you are an individual or a company.

Apparently you don't get fact specific. That means each incident that caused deaths in the Toyota case have to be looked at and examined individually to see what facts are specific to those cases. Maybe they aren't all Toyota's fault, maybe they are. Without complete knowledge of all the facts, you can't just scream "lawyers suck" and bury your head in the sand.

Are there frivilous law suits? Of course there are. Are all lawsuits frivilous? Of course they are not.

Many look frivilous upon reading the headlines, but then when you look further, you find that the specific facts involved in that specific incident make the case anything but frivilous, like the McDonalds Coffee case.

When you come on here trying to denegrate an entire profession just to make a point, you really do come off as a guy who is just regurgitating what he hears on talk radio, and I'm on your side of the political spectrum.

And no, I'm not an attorney.

I never said "lawyers suck" those are your words, nor did I denigrate the entire profession. I gave information pertaining to a book FULL of specifics that call for tort reform mostly in the education field. I then sighted two examples of "Slip and Fall" lawyers who more than likely created their cases.

And your right, there must be consequences for improper behavior, of which I'm willing to bet the majority of auto accidents are a result of the drivers behavior, not the automobile. Considering mopping up after such results is what I do for a living I'd say giving my oppinion on it is FAR from simply regurgitating what I hear on the radio. In fact I saw a fine example of "Prudentialitis" yesterday on Beach and the East Freeway.

I'm sorry the overall point to this entire thread was lost on you.

Rick

UNT90 · February 25, 2010

I heard this guy interviewed on Medved today who I thought had an interesting message. He's got a new book out called "Life Without Lawyers". He explains why it is that you may see a label on a baby stroller today that reads "Remove child before folding stroller", and explains how the legal system has choked down the American business/inventing spirit.

Here's an 18 minute video of him.

Rick

Gee, I guess I misunderstood the title of the book you were quoting.

If anything has choked down the American business/inventing spirit, it is the American business/inventing spirit refusing to stand up for what is right and settling cases that have no merit simply to avoid the headache.

Feed a rat cheese every day at 5, and you'll see that rat everyday at 5. Starve the rat, and the rat goes away.

This is a much more complex issue than just pointing fingers at lawyers.

UNT90 · February 25, 2010

And your right, there must be consequences for improper behavior, of which I'm willing to bet the majority of auto accidents are a result of the drivers behavior, not the automobile. Considering mopping up after such results is what I do for a living I'd say giving my oppinion on it is FAR from simply regurgitating what I hear on the radio. In fact I saw a fine example of "Prudentialitis" yesterday on Beach and the East Freeway.

I'm sorry the overall point to this entire thread was lost on you.

Rick

Duh. Lawsuits aren't filed on "the majority of accidents". It's the minority where there is a safety issue that wasn't addressed by the manufacturer after numerous warnings that beg attorney's attention. Are false claims filed? Yes. Want a solution? Tell them to pound sand.

You treat victim's of accidents. You are not a vehicle safety expert and you don't even decide the cause of the accident. That's a job for the police. So, yes, you have no idea about the factors that caused the accident. You may have opinions, but that don't cut it.

FirefightnRick · February 25, 2010

Duh. Lawsuits aren't filed on "the majority of accidents". It's the minority where there is a safety issue

Exactly, yet what do we currently have? A congress raking an entire automobile company with an excellent safety record over the coals, causing as much damage as possible for what may appear to be a small specific problem. So thank you for making my point.

Rick

Edited February 25, 2010 by FirefightnRick

FirefightnRick · February 25, 2010

You treat victim's of accidents. You are not a vehicle safety expert and you don't even decide the cause of the accident. That's a job for the police. So, yes, you have no idea about the factors that caused the accident. You may have opinions, but that don't cut it.

Really? Wow! Your going to now preach to me about my job? Your now sure that I don't ever work with scene investigators?

Would you like for me to start posting photos, or would you simply like for me to send them to you by email?

Rick

UNT90 · February 26, 2010

Exactly, yet what do we currently have? A congress raking an entire automobile company with an excellent safety record over the coals, causing as much damage as possible for what may appear to be a small specific problem. So thank you for making my point.

Rick

Really? Wow! Your going to now preach to me about my job? Your now sure that I don't ever work with scene investigators?

Would you like for me to start posting photos, or would you simply like for me to send them to you by email?

Rick

Let's try and stay on point. This originally didn't have anything to do with congress (yes, it's a complete waste of time), but about you attacking a profession that you know very little about.

I don't need photos, just a list of accident reconstruction schools that you have attended and the certificates you have received, along with your vehicle safety quality control training records, and your background in physics. I'm sure you have been on a scene when police investigated, so what? I've worked with doctors, but that doesn't mean I'm qualified to do surgery.

Send whatever pics you want. I promise you I have seen much worse.

But how about the men's Basketbal team tonite?!?!

GMG

Shuke-D · February 26, 2010

I wouldn't put too much effort into this UNT90. You know the refrain now:

The Hinderburg? The Titanic? Never heard of them. Before my time. But I did see a wicked 3 car pile up at work last week. GREATEST WRECK EVER!

As some poster pointed out recently on another forum, we tend to overvalue our own personal observations and not respect the perspective that history, er, tradition gives us.

FirefightnRick · February 26, 2010

Let's try and stay on point.

But how about the men's Basketbal team tonite?!?!

Stay on point? You blew that in your first post.

Silver posted an article dealing with frivilous lawsuits, mostly dealing with personal injury "Slip and Fall" lawyers. I followed that up with another about a book a man wrote about concerning the same thing, then later an article by John Stossel restating the same theme.

But you bring up trial and defense lawyers into it with:

Everyone hates attorneys...

Until they need one.

Need one, like as in a defense lawyer when your in trouble? Stay on point. I don't believe I read anywhere in which the authors were hammering defense lawyers?

But since we can't stay on point, how about that basketball team tonight?

Rick

UNT90 · February 26, 2010

Stay on point? You blew that in your first post.

Silver posted an article dealing with frivilous lawsuits, mostly dealing with personal injury "Slip and Fall" lawyers. I followed that up with another about a book a man wrote about concerning the same thing, then later an article by John Stossel restating the same theme.

But you bring up trial and defense lawyers into it with:

Need one, like as in a defense lawyer when your in trouble? Stay on point. I don't believe I read anywhere in which the authors were hammering defense lawyers?

But since we can't stay on point, how about that basketball team tonight?

Rick

Dude. I am seriously beginning to worry about you. You clearly don't understand that profession, or else you would understand that "needing an attorney" could mean anything from getting a Last Will and Testiment, getting a divorce, consulting with an employment attorney when unjustly disciplined (yes, it happens), contract attorneys, to civil attorneys who, yes, actually go to trial on civil lawsuits, which would make them... wait for it... trial attorneys.

At no point did I mention anything about defense attorneys.

But Tristan was great tonight, wasn't he?

Edited February 26, 2010 by UNT90