Posted on 08/22/2005 12:29:51 PM PDT by SmithL
It's still ok to sell it to a pyro, though...right?
IT'S A MADHOUSE!!!!
This ruling makes no sense.
There goes the "pay-at-the-pump" option if the idiot court holds the station owner responsible; won't do much for pump first-pay later, either.
This is the epitome of STUPID!
What the HELL ever happened to personal responsibility?
Why not shoot the idiot who sold him the car? Or the poltroon who gave birth to him? {/sarcasm}
WHat if he had already pumped the gas and went inside? Would they send him out with a can and a tube to syphon it out?
what is the going rate for a gas station attendant with a medical degree?
The ruling allows the jury to decide if I read the article correctly.
"
|
|||
!
I have a much better idea!
All lawyers are to be held 100% responsible for any murder, robbery, rape, etc committed by a felon who was released through their sleazy lies.
Lawyers will received the maximum penalty for whatever crime is commited by their actions.
------
------
If the devil is the living flesh of evil, then here is who I think he is. Far from appearing as a hideous demon, he is the average-looking person who walks into a room and shakes your hand with a smile. By the time he leaves, the standards of decency of everyone within that room have been lowered ever so slightly. --- A lawyer come to mind.
If I'm walking down the street and a drunk pulls over and asks me for directions, am I liable if I tell the route, and then an accident occurs along that route?
Supreme court has gone stark raving mad, my God, it's never the drunk's fault, heaven forbid he/she be responsible for his/her actions, blame everyone else, I can't stand it anymore, there has got to be another planet somewhere where sanity prevails.
There is no such thing. The lawyers took that away long ago. It's now everybody's fault. They are a victim of society.
Put a couple of high payout lawsuits behiind this, and all the 'pay at the pump' units will have to be replaced. Self-service will exist no more.
Gas prices aren't exactly going to go down under that scenario.
Okay, not as bad as the title suggests. The court here was simply ruling whether negligence could be possible.
Reading the facts of the case, it seems like it's within the realm of possibility that what happened here was negligence. Especially the part about off-duty station employees helping this guy pump his gas.
Selling this guy gas is in the same ballpark as handing a visibly intoxicated man a firearm.
Oh, don't worry, I'm sure it's just a matter of time!
|
|||
!
For the love of God, everyone ought to be able to sue someone.
They also oughta be able to sue the car manufacturer, the people who built the car, the company who manufactures the liquor they drank, the bartender/club owner/liquor store clerk/liquor store owner, and anyone else the victims family can squeeze money out of.
BTW, in this day and age of pay at the pump, how is a gas station supposed to stop the sale of gas to someone they never even see?
*sigh*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.