Ethical Collapse in America

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

JettaKD

black_wing_angel

mistercombine

An Ethical collapse in America. Hm, how would this have started... Fear. Yes, that's right, fear. See, in our society today, everyone lives in fear of causing a lawsuit, thus, any action they preform is judged. So, people live in fear of performing an Ethical act, such as stopping a robbery, or some such, because of that same simple fear.

To reverse this trend, we must refer to ancient wisdom. "Shoot the Lawyers" Sarcasm, yes, but we really need to limit the power of the law outside true criminal cases.

Yeah, like that guy that got sued for pulling a woman out of a submerged car, SAVING HER LIFE, but also causing her nerve damage, from pulling her out.

If he saved my life, I wouldn't care if I never walked again, I'd just be happy to BREATHE again! And yet, the ungrateful b***h sued him! The implication being "Don't be a hero, it's not worth it!" And that's sad.

People have become sue-happy. A guy poors hot coffee in his own lap, and it's McDonald's fault, for having HOT coffee? I know there are places that offer chilled coffee, but generally, coffee is served HOT! It's COMMON ******** KNOWLEDGE! And yet, the judge did not throw out the case, as far as I know.

And seeing as how judges have the power to throw out any case they deem to be unworthy, then I'd throw a lot of blame their way, for allowing these cases.

It is as you said, it's fear of being sued. God forbid I do something wrong, without someone suing me for it.

While I cannot comment as to the case of the woman in the first case, may I interject on the McDonald's coffee case?

Yes, it is to be expected that coffee will be hot and that burns will occur upon spilling the coffee onto oneself. However, in this particular case, the coffee was so hot that when dropped it gave the woman in question burns so severe that it fused her labia together and cause severe third degree burns on her lap and thighs. I realize it seems like a stupid case on the surface, and if the damage that happened did not occur, it would be a frivolous lawsuit. However, the coffee was much hotter that it should have been and McDonald's was, in my opinion, at fault for the woman's injuries.

I disagree. While yes, the burns were bad, and all, it was not a worker at McDonalds which spilled the coffee on her lap. As I understand it, she spilled it on herself. Regardless of how ridiculously hot it may have been, if you spill it on YOURSELF, YOU are at fault for the resulting burns. The temperature of the beverage is irrelevant. Who spilled it, is what counts.

Point of order: she was a passenger in a car that went through the drive through. The car hit a speed bump and the coffee was spilled. The spill was really nobody's fault. What was at fault was the coffee's temperature. It was literally near boiling. Coffee that hot is physically undrinkable, so why serve it at a temperature that's pointlessly hot? Hot coffee is hot, sure. Hot coffee should not be boiling.

Well, ok, I didn't know about the speed bump. First off, I'd like to point out that, if taken "slowly" there's minimal "shock" from hitting the speed bump. If they took the bump "correctly", then the coffee shouldn't have spilled, as long as it had a good lid on it.

But I will concede that the temperature is more important than I previously thought.

Quote:

Also, I'd like to point something out that bugs the ******** out of me:
Mark Wahlberg, aka 'Marky Mark'. As a teenager, he was convicted of aggravated assault and battery for beating a Vietnamese shopkeeper with a stick, permanently blinding him. At age 21, he and a friend held down Wahlberg's neighbor and beat him senseless for apparently no reason, leaving the man incapacitated with a broken jaw. The first offense had him sentenced to two years. He served 45 days. Being sentenced to more than one year means he CANNOT TOUCH A GUN EVER AGAIN by federal law.



Are those guns real, or props? My dad asked the BATF. They don't know, and don't care. They can't be ******** to find out. This is the ********. They'd come down like a sack of lead bricks on any normal citizen for this s**t.

I'm thinking they're props, due to it being Hollywood. I doubt Hollywood ever allows a "real" gun in movies, anymore, anyway. Once upon a time, the guns had to be real (albeit, shooting blanks), but anymore, we have camera magic technology, that you can make a REALISTIC gunshot effect emit from a ******** STICK, if you felt so inclined. Especially if you're using Hollywood grade tools.

So, yeah, most likely just props.

But I do think it's bullshit that the BATF won't even "look into it", like they're supposed to...  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

JettaKD

black_wing_angel

Yeah, like that guy that got sued for pulling a woman out of a submerged car, SAVING HER LIFE, but also causing her nerve damage, from pulling her out.

If he saved my life, I wouldn't care if I never walked again, I'd just be happy to BREATHE again! And yet, the ungrateful b***h sued him! The implication being "Don't be a hero, it's not worth it!" And that's sad.

People have become sue-happy. A guy poors hot coffee in his own lap, and it's McDonald's fault, for having HOT coffee? I know there are places that offer chilled coffee, but generally, coffee is served HOT! It's COMMON ******** KNOWLEDGE! And yet, the judge did not throw out the case, as far as I know.

And seeing as how judges have the power to throw out any case they deem to be unworthy, then I'd throw a lot of blame their way, for allowing these cases.

It is as you said, it's fear of being sued. God forbid I do something wrong, without someone suing me for it.

While I cannot comment as to the case of the woman in the first case, may I interject on the McDonald's coffee case?

Yes, it is to be expected that coffee will be hot and that burns will occur upon spilling the coffee onto oneself. However, in this particular case, the coffee was so hot that when dropped it gave the woman in question burns so severe that it fused her labia together and cause severe third degree burns on her lap and thighs. I realize it seems like a stupid case on the surface, and if the damage that happened did not occur, it would be a frivolous lawsuit. However, the coffee was much hotter that it should have been and McDonald's was, in my opinion, at fault for the woman's injuries.

I disagree. While yes, the burns were bad, and all, it was not a worker at McDonalds which spilled the coffee on her lap. As I understand it, she spilled it on herself. Regardless of how ridiculously hot it may have been, if you spill it on YOURSELF, YOU are at fault for the resulting burns. The temperature of the beverage is irrelevant. Who spilled it, is what counts.

Point of order: she was a passenger in a car that went through the drive through. The car hit a speed bump and the coffee was spilled. The spill was really nobody's fault. What was at fault was the coffee's temperature. It was literally near boiling. Coffee that hot is physically undrinkable, so why serve it at a temperature that's pointlessly hot? Hot coffee is hot, sure. Hot coffee should not be boiling.

Well, ok, I didn't know about the speed bump. First off, I'd like to point out that, if taken "slowly" there's minimal "shock" from hitting the speed bump. If they took the bump "correctly", then the coffee shouldn't have spilled, as long as it had a good lid on it.

But I will concede that the temperature is more important than I previously thought.

IMO, it's on par with going into a spa and stepping into a bubbling hot tub only to discover that it's not bubbling because the bubblers are on, it's just boiling water. Sure you expect it to be hot water, but there's no reason for the water to be that hot. It's just unsafe.

Quote:

Quote:

Also, I'd like to point something out that bugs the ******** out of me:
Mark Wahlberg, aka 'Marky Mark'. As a teenager, he was convicted of aggravated assault and battery for beating a Vietnamese shopkeeper with a stick, permanently blinding him. At age 21, he and a friend held down Wahlberg's neighbor and beat him senseless for apparently no reason, leaving the man incapacitated with a broken jaw. The first offense had him sentenced to two years. He served 45 days. Being sentenced to more than one year means he CANNOT TOUCH A GUN EVER AGAIN by federal law.

Are those guns real, or props? My dad asked the BATF. They don't know, and don't care. They can't be ******** to find out. This is the ********. They'd come down like a sack of lead bricks on any normal citizen for this s**t.

I'm thinking they're props, due to it being Hollywood. I doubt Hollywood ever allows a "real" gun in movies, anymore, anyway. Once upon a time, the guns had to be real (albeit, shooting blanks), but anymore, we have camera magic technology, that you can make a REALISTIC gunshot effect emit from a ******** STICK, if you felt so inclined. Especially if you're using Hollywood grade tools.

So, yeah, most likely just props.

But I do think it's bullshit that the BATF won't even "look into it", like they're supposed to...

Shooter:
Tom Felcan .... firearms supplier [also credited as an armorer in other films]
Ryan Steacy .... weapons coordinator

Max Payne:
Charles Taylor .... armorer
Al Vrkljan .... armorer

And if you've ever heard the story of Brandon Lee, accidentally shot and killed execution-style during the filming of The Crow, you know they DO use real guns most times. Why use fakes when you can just as easily use the real thing? I know there's companies in Cali who get around the state's gun laws so they can supply firearms to movie studios.  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

JettaKD

While I cannot comment as to the case of the woman in the first case, may I interject on the McDonald's coffee case?

Yes, it is to be expected that coffee will be hot and that burns will occur upon spilling the coffee onto oneself. However, in this particular case, the coffee was so hot that when dropped it gave the woman in question burns so severe that it fused her labia together and cause severe third degree burns on her lap and thighs. I realize it seems like a stupid case on the surface, and if the damage that happened did not occur, it would be a frivolous lawsuit. However, the coffee was much hotter that it should have been and McDonald's was, in my opinion, at fault for the woman's injuries.

I disagree. While yes, the burns were bad, and all, it was not a worker at McDonalds which spilled the coffee on her lap. As I understand it, she spilled it on herself. Regardless of how ridiculously hot it may have been, if you spill it on YOURSELF, YOU are at fault for the resulting burns. The temperature of the beverage is irrelevant. Who spilled it, is what counts.

Point of order: she was a passenger in a car that went through the drive through. The car hit a speed bump and the coffee was spilled. The spill was really nobody's fault. What was at fault was the coffee's temperature. It was literally near boiling. Coffee that hot is physically undrinkable, so why serve it at a temperature that's pointlessly hot? Hot coffee is hot, sure. Hot coffee should not be boiling.

Well, ok, I didn't know about the speed bump. First off, I'd like to point out that, if taken "slowly" there's minimal "shock" from hitting the speed bump. If they took the bump "correctly", then the coffee shouldn't have spilled, as long as it had a good lid on it.

But I will concede that the temperature is more important than I previously thought.

IMO, it's on par with going into a spa and stepping into a bubbling hot tub only to discover that it's not bubbling because the bubblers are on, it's just boiling water. Sure you expect it to be hot water, but there's no reason for the water to be that hot. It's just unsafe.

Quote:

Quote:

Also, I'd like to point something out that bugs the ******** out of me:
Mark Wahlberg, aka 'Marky Mark'. As a teenager, he was convicted of aggravated assault and battery for beating a Vietnamese shopkeeper with a stick, permanently blinding him. At age 21, he and a friend held down Wahlberg's neighbor and beat him senseless for apparently no reason, leaving the man incapacitated with a broken jaw. The first offense had him sentenced to two years. He served 45 days. Being sentenced to more than one year means he CANNOT TOUCH A GUN EVER AGAIN by federal law.

Are those guns real, or props? My dad asked the BATF. They don't know, and don't care. They can't be ******** to find out. This is the ********. They'd come down like a sack of lead bricks on any normal citizen for this s**t.

I'm thinking they're props, due to it being Hollywood. I doubt Hollywood ever allows a "real" gun in movies, anymore, anyway. Once upon a time, the guns had to be real (albeit, shooting blanks), but anymore, we have camera magic technology, that you can make a REALISTIC gunshot effect emit from a ******** STICK, if you felt so inclined. Especially if you're using Hollywood grade tools.

So, yeah, most likely just props.

But I do think it's bullshit that the BATF won't even "look into it", like they're supposed to...

Shooter:
Tom Felcan .... firearms supplier [also credited as an armorer in other films]
Ryan Steacy .... weapons coordinator

Max Payne:
Charles Taylor .... armorer
Al Vrkljan .... armorer

And if you've ever heard the story of Brandon Lee, accidentally shot and killed execution-style during the filming of The Crow, you know they DO use real guns most times. Why use fakes when you can just as easily use the real thing? I know there's companies in Cali who get around the state's gun laws so they can supply firearms to movie studios.

I thought they stopped using real guns BECAUSE of the Brandon Lee incident.  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

I disagree. While yes, the burns were bad, and all, it was not a worker at McDonalds which spilled the coffee on her lap. As I understand it, she spilled it on herself. Regardless of how ridiculously hot it may have been, if you spill it on YOURSELF, YOU are at fault for the resulting burns. The temperature of the beverage is irrelevant. Who spilled it, is what counts.

Point of order: she was a passenger in a car that went through the drive through. The car hit a speed bump and the coffee was spilled. The spill was really nobody's fault. What was at fault was the coffee's temperature. It was literally near boiling. Coffee that hot is physically undrinkable, so why serve it at a temperature that's pointlessly hot? Hot coffee is hot, sure. Hot coffee should not be boiling.

Well, ok, I didn't know about the speed bump. First off, I'd like to point out that, if taken "slowly" there's minimal "shock" from hitting the speed bump. If they took the bump "correctly", then the coffee shouldn't have spilled, as long as it had a good lid on it.

But I will concede that the temperature is more important than I previously thought.

IMO, it's on par with going into a spa and stepping into a bubbling hot tub only to discover that it's not bubbling because the bubblers are on, it's just boiling water. Sure you expect it to be hot water, but there's no reason for the water to be that hot. It's just unsafe.

Quote:

Quote:

Also, I'd like to point something out that bugs the ******** out of me:
Mark Wahlberg, aka 'Marky Mark'. As a teenager, he was convicted of aggravated assault and battery for beating a Vietnamese shopkeeper with a stick, permanently blinding him. At age 21, he and a friend held down Wahlberg's neighbor and beat him senseless for apparently no reason, leaving the man incapacitated with a broken jaw. The first offense had him sentenced to two years. He served 45 days. Being sentenced to more than one year means he CANNOT TOUCH A GUN EVER AGAIN by federal law.

Are those guns real, or props? My dad asked the BATF. They don't know, and don't care. They can't be ******** to find out. This is the ********. They'd come down like a sack of lead bricks on any normal citizen for this s**t.

I'm thinking they're props, due to it being Hollywood. I doubt Hollywood ever allows a "real" gun in movies, anymore, anyway. Once upon a time, the guns had to be real (albeit, shooting blanks), but anymore, we have camera magic technology, that you can make a REALISTIC gunshot effect emit from a ******** STICK, if you felt so inclined. Especially if you're using Hollywood grade tools.

So, yeah, most likely just props.

But I do think it's bullshit that the BATF won't even "look into it", like they're supposed to...

Shooter:
Tom Felcan .... firearms supplier [also credited as an armorer in other films]
Ryan Steacy .... weapons coordinator

Max Payne:
Charles Taylor .... armorer
Al Vrkljan .... armorer

And if you've ever heard the story of Brandon Lee, accidentally shot and killed execution-style during the filming of The Crow, you know they DO use real guns most times. Why use fakes when you can just as easily use the real thing? I know there's companies in Cali who get around the state's gun laws so they can supply firearms to movie studios.

I thought they stopped using real guns BECAUSE of the Brandon Lee incident.

No, they just stopped being total idiots about guns. Personally I think whoever decided squibs should be used should have been charged with negligent homicide.  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

Point of order: she was a passenger in a car that went through the drive through. The car hit a speed bump and the coffee was spilled. The spill was really nobody's fault. What was at fault was the coffee's temperature. It was literally near boiling. Coffee that hot is physically undrinkable, so why serve it at a temperature that's pointlessly hot? Hot coffee is hot, sure. Hot coffee should not be boiling.

Well, ok, I didn't know about the speed bump. First off, I'd like to point out that, if taken "slowly" there's minimal "shock" from hitting the speed bump. If they took the bump "correctly", then the coffee shouldn't have spilled, as long as it had a good lid on it.

But I will concede that the temperature is more important than I previously thought.

IMO, it's on par with going into a spa and stepping into a bubbling hot tub only to discover that it's not bubbling because the bubblers are on, it's just boiling water. Sure you expect it to be hot water, but there's no reason for the water to be that hot. It's just unsafe.

Quote:

Quote:

Also, I'd like to point something out that bugs the ******** out of me:
Mark Wahlberg, aka 'Marky Mark'. As a teenager, he was convicted of aggravated assault and battery for beating a Vietnamese shopkeeper with a stick, permanently blinding him. At age 21, he and a friend held down Wahlberg's neighbor and beat him senseless for apparently no reason, leaving the man incapacitated with a broken jaw. The first offense had him sentenced to two years. He served 45 days. Being sentenced to more than one year means he CANNOT TOUCH A GUN EVER AGAIN by federal law.

Are those guns real, or props? My dad asked the BATF. They don't know, and don't care. They can't be ******** to find out. This is the ********. They'd come down like a sack of lead bricks on any normal citizen for this s**t.

I'm thinking they're props, due to it being Hollywood. I doubt Hollywood ever allows a "real" gun in movies, anymore, anyway. Once upon a time, the guns had to be real (albeit, shooting blanks), but anymore, we have camera magic technology, that you can make a REALISTIC gunshot effect emit from a ******** STICK, if you felt so inclined. Especially if you're using Hollywood grade tools.

So, yeah, most likely just props.

But I do think it's bullshit that the BATF won't even "look into it", like they're supposed to...

Shooter:
Tom Felcan .... firearms supplier [also credited as an armorer in other films]
Ryan Steacy .... weapons coordinator

Max Payne:
Charles Taylor .... armorer
Al Vrkljan .... armorer

And if you've ever heard the story of Brandon Lee, accidentally shot and killed execution-style during the filming of The Crow, you know they DO use real guns most times. Why use fakes when you can just as easily use the real thing? I know there's companies in Cali who get around the state's gun laws so they can supply firearms to movie studios.

I thought they stopped using real guns BECAUSE of the Brandon Lee incident.

No, they just stopped being total idiots about guns. Personally I think whoever decided squibs should be used should have been charged with negligent homicide.

Definitely.

But why, in this golden age of cinema technology, would they continue to use real guns in movies? It seems unnecssary.  

[Fresnel]

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Well, ok, I didn't know about the speed bump. First off, I'd like to point out that, if taken "slowly" there's minimal "shock" from hitting the speed bump. If they took the bump "correctly", then the coffee shouldn't have spilled, as long as it had a good lid on it.

But I will concede that the temperature is more important than I previously thought.

IMO, it's on par with going into a spa and stepping into a bubbling hot tub only to discover that it's not bubbling because the bubblers are on, it's just boiling water. Sure you expect it to be hot water, but there's no reason for the water to be that hot. It's just unsafe.

Quote:

I'm thinking they're props, due to it being Hollywood. I doubt Hollywood ever allows a "real" gun in movies, anymore, anyway. Once upon a time, the guns had to be real (albeit, shooting blanks), but anymore, we have camera magic technology, that you can make a REALISTIC gunshot effect emit from a ******** STICK, if you felt so inclined. Especially if you're using Hollywood grade tools.

So, yeah, most likely just props.

But I do think it's bullshit that the BATF won't even "look into it", like they're supposed to...

Shooter:
Tom Felcan .... firearms supplier [also credited as an armorer in other films]
Ryan Steacy .... weapons coordinator

Max Payne:
Charles Taylor .... armorer
Al Vrkljan .... armorer

And if you've ever heard the story of Brandon Lee, accidentally shot and killed execution-style during the filming of The Crow, you know they DO use real guns most times. Why use fakes when you can just as easily use the real thing? I know there's companies in Cali who get around the state's gun laws so they can supply firearms to movie studios.

I thought they stopped using real guns BECAUSE of the Brandon Lee incident.

No, they just stopped being total idiots about guns. Personally I think whoever decided squibs should be used should have been charged with negligent homicide.

Definitely.

But why, in this golden age of cinema technology, would they continue to use real guns in movies? It seems unnecssary.

The exact same reason they still use real actors. Fake guns never look quite right and have to be heavily altered, and good fakes are more expensive than real guns, and harder to find. You can get just about any gun ever made for the right price, but more often than not the fake version of it would have to be custom made.  

[black_wing_angel]

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

black_wing_angel

Fresnel

IMO, it's on par with going into a spa and stepping into a bubbling hot tub only to discover that it's not bubbling because the bubblers are on, it's just boiling water. Sure you expect it to be hot water, but there's no reason for the water to be that hot. It's just unsafe.

Shooter:
Tom Felcan .... firearms supplier [also credited as an armorer in other films]
Ryan Steacy .... weapons coordinator

Max Payne:
Charles Taylor .... armorer
Al Vrkljan .... armorer

And if you've ever heard the story of Brandon Lee, accidentally shot and killed execution-style during the filming of The Crow, you know they DO use real guns most times. Why use fakes when you can just as easily use the real thing? I know there's companies in Cali who get around the state's gun laws so they can supply firearms to movie studios.

I thought they stopped using real guns BECAUSE of the Brandon Lee incident.

No, they just stopped being total idiots about guns. Personally I think whoever decided squibs should be used should have been charged with negligent homicide.

Definitely.

But why, in this golden age of cinema technology, would they continue to use real guns in movies? It seems unnecssary.

The exact same reason they still use real actors. Fake guns never look quite right and have to be heavily altered, and good fakes are more expensive than real guns, and harder to find. You can get just about any gun ever made for the right price, but more often than not the fake version of it would have to be custom made.

Ok, that makes sense, then...