Nightingale

Roseanne Barr is a moron no matter which way you look at it.

I am a liberal. I am pro-choice. I would never, ever have an abortion, yet I refuse to force my own decision on someone else. I am pro gay rights. The gender of the individual someone chooses to marry has absolutely nothing to do with me and does not affect my own relationship decisions. I am pro marijuana legalization (although I do not smoke it). Put the same restrictions on it as alcohol and let adults make their own choices. (highly addictive substances are another matter, however) and I support the right to bear arms, provided that right is executed in a responsible, adult manner. From my perspective, individual freedoms are important. I don't like my choices being taken away, and I will not support legislation to take away others' ability to make their own life decisions about the things that are important to them.

Even in the US, AFAIK, you can't have a waiver that releases a party from being sued for actions of "gross negligence". If they were aware of the problems with the reserve and did nothing, that would probably constitute gross negligence. But, I'm not a lawyer (yet), so I couldn't say for sure, but here's an example of a case regarding a health club, and the findings of the appeals court: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Xu v. Gay, 668 N.W.2d 166 (Ct. App., Mich., 2003) In a case where a patron of a health club died from injuries when he fell from a treadmill, an appeals court held that while the liability waiver would protect the club from suit in case of ordinary negligence, it would not relieve the club in the event that gross negligence could be shown. DECISION: Gross negligence is conduct so reckless as to demonstrate a substantial lack of concern for whether an injury results. If plaintiffs could demonstrate such negligence, then there could be a cause of action against the defendants. The liability waiver signed by Yan could release defendants from liability for ordinary negligence, but would not apply in case of gross negligence, which would have to be demonstrated at trial. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Courts have ruled that waivers relating to sport activities (e.g., skiing, scuba diving, auto racing) are not against public policy. Since sport businesses do not provide an essential public service, any economic advantage in bargaining that a small business may have over customers will not create unequal bargaining power since customers have a multitude of alternatives. Waivers seeking to protect from liability for gross negligence or willful and wanton acts are invalid.

I live in california.

made or imported PRIOR TO 1985. What if I want one that was made last week? I'm a law abiding citizen with no interest other than as a collector. why can't I buy one?

You'd sue if your overloaded overspeed reserve canopy mal'd? I may be misunderstanding which statement your answering. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Chile, you did misinterpret that one. the two previous posters were saying that if they overloaded, it would be their fault, but if operating within the mfg recommendations, and the mfg released a bulletin a month later to get what caused your accident fixed, then yes, they would sue.

med school joke = funny! cat picture = definitely NOT funny. Just sad.

you can order them from square1 too.

if you've committed a felony, you give up some of your rights. the right to bear arms should be one of them. what I object to is the gun laws prohibiting regular citizens from carrying or even owning handguns.

sure they affect law abiding citizens. examples: I can't just go out and buy a handgun. I have to wait while they do a background check on me. Two weeks or something like that. Sorry, if I'm buying a gun for protection, TODAY would be a good time. I can't go out and buy an automatic weapon. They're completely illegal. Nevermind I just want to see what it would do on a range.

seems like he wasn't claiming that he didn't know it was dangerous. he was claiming that the flaw in the canopy made by the party in question increased that risk out of the normal level.

all gun laws do is keep guns away from people who follow gun laws: Law Abiding Citizens. Preventative laws don't affect felons, as felons don't follow laws.

then why is everyone so upset over someone suing a parachute manufacturer over a design flaw? edit: not directed at Quade, but a general comment, he was just last when I hit reply.

even if they didn't listen much, maybe some of it would've sunk in. better than saying nothing at all. Were I on a jury and the defense didn't bother to show up to say their piece, I would assume that to mean that they had no defense to present.

he wouldn't have to be an expert witness to be on the stand, would he? he's the defendant. he gets to say his piece regardless.

the manufacturer didn't even have to retain a lawyer. they could just show up to explain their side. Its unorthodox, but in this situation may have been more effective than not showing up at all, because all the jury had to go on was testimony from one side. even if the manufacturer had represented themselves, the situation couldn't have turned out any worse.

The lawsuit was alleging that the company knew about problems with the reserve, and neglected to inform the owners of said reserves. that is a serious allegation, and, if true (probably not), I feel the jury was dead on. If there was an inherent design flaw in that canopy and the company, with full knowledge of the flaw, neglected to rectify the situation, then they could very well be at fault for causing this jumper's injuries. Its the same as sending a car out onto the road when the company knows it has faulty breaks. Sure, cars get in accidents. We all know that, and we accept that risk when we drive them, but, we put our trust that the manufacturer would not let a vehicle on the road with a flaw that could potentially cause an accident. Same with canopies. We accept the risks with their normal use, but when a problem with the design of a canopy causes injury to a jumper, that falls outside the realm of normal risk. That said, if there was a flaw in the canopy (probably not), its doubtful that the company woudn't take steps to recall the canopies immediately, for the simple reason that their reputation is on the line. I do find it odd that the company apparently chose not to answer the suit.

something I learned from my karate instructor: Hydrogen peroxide removes bloodstains. The other guy decided to block my kick with his face and got blood all over my nice white uniform.

went from a spectre 230 to a spectre 210. same canopy, just a bit smaller.

Girl, that just sounds WRONG!

your JM was kissing you during AFF???

nah. if it'd been anywhere other than in front of my students, I'd have probably been whining like a baby.

lol. that sounds familiar. One of my karate students did a grab wrong and dislocated my thumb where the supporting metacarpal meets the wrist. he put so much pressure on the top part of that bone, where it connects to the thumb, that it popped the bottom part out of place. I looked down at it (and it looked pretty nasty!), walked into the office, closed the door, grabbed the thumb and reset the damn thing. The injury itself didn't hurt, but resetting it sure did! I wrapped it up and went back out on the floor to finish teaching class. After, I drove myself to the ER for an x-ray.

you're also in memphis.

I haven't, but I don't know if I count... I finished aff, but dont' have the license yet (hopefully this saturday, if I can memorize the damn cloud clearance and do my hop and pop, plus two more jumps)