[allmost]

You think this is the bat’s fault. Explain.

[nathanbedford]

You missed the entire thrust of my post.

However I suspect that the plaintiffs lawyer will look for some "defect" or will contrive an argument that there was a "failure to warn" of the greater acceleration of a ball off the metal bat or some such thing. He will find an expert who will so testify, no matter how implausibly, and the decision then goes to the jury which, being human-and we want them to be human-might very well render a verdict out of sympathy for the pathetically injured child.

Most of the posts on this thread have missed the whole point, if you want to spread the risk, there are a lot of hidden costs to pay. If you do not want to spread the risk , then horribly injured children will necessarily go uncompensated. My post is in favor of neither one. I just wish that those who comment would grapple with the real issue.

[perez24]

I only read the blurb, but if the bat was illegal by league standards they might have a point. My church softball league bans most “live” bats, but we’re just a bunch of dorks running around in the park. Maybe that league did the same, in which case it’s not the manufacturer’s fault, but the league probably doesn’t have pockets as deep.

Seeing my brothers nose pointed toward his shoulder and gushing blood after being hit by a line drive from a 10 year old turned me off of pitching forever.

Thank God my son plays a safe game...lacrosse!!!!