Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Demeter
I guess this means when our friends jump off a bridge, we will all jump too.
This is the one of the stupidest things I ever heard. Do people not take danger seriously anymore?
I know if I did something like that as a kid, if the fall didn't kill me, my father would have for being too stupid to live.
|
this is a classic example that proves the point I made earlier:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by rat
. some people are inherrently more prone to risk-taking, some more prone to risk-aversion. those prone to risk-aversion tend to classify those prone to risk-taking as "idiots." that last part is simply an observation of tendencies, not a judgement on either party.
|
I love how people who choose not to take risks that
potentially endanger life or limb like to classify those who do as idiots. While you're at it, you might as well call test pilots, people who test new styles of parachutes, astronauts, skydivers, bungee jumpers and base jumpers "idiots." Every single one of those professions and hobbies comes with an inherrent risk that your life could be ended
if something goes wrong. However, what you fail to acknowledge with your judgemental ways is that
every single person that gets behind the wheel of an automibile risks their life to a greater extent than any of the above stated activites. Your potential for serious injury and death while behind the wheel of a car is far greater than participating in any other activity people do in their lives. These kids didn't know their limits
because they are fucking kids for christ's sake. But guess what, people don't learn their limits without testing them, and as adolescents, we're far more prone to take risks far beyond the envelope of our physical capabilities.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by CrAzEd
And suing the city? Wtf is that man. Its not the cities fault they go out and do this.
|
Actually, by law and ethical standards, due to gross negligence on the city and company's fault for
failing to provide adequate preventative measures for safety by not erecting even simple chain link fences, along with the fact that it occurred on their property, they ARE responsible for the actions of those kids. As a property owner, you are liable for ALL actions of people on your property, and when you fail to take reasonable measures (ie, floor to ceiling chainlink fences on the upper stories of a parking garage), you are committing a criminal act of negligence, and should be held liable for it. Fences wouldn't just keep people from doing things like this, but protect ALL their patrons, especially those with small children that could slip away from parents and stumble off the edge. Fences are NOT an unreasonable expense or even that costly of one to ensure the safety of your clients and their families. In fact, not having them should turn out to be far more costly for them in the long run. It's a matter of consumer/tort law that companies/property owners
have to take reasonable measures to ensure the safety of their patrons and people on their property. why do you think that Wet Floor signs are put up when a place has a spill and/or after they mop the floor--your safety.