Stupid decisions by the courts

[Lisa O'Brien]

The Supreme Court just ruled a family could sue Mazda over the death of a family member because Mazda did not install shoulder/lap belts in the rear seats of the vehicle - even though the National Highway and traffic safety Administration did not require them. To me this is ridiculous - if your in a head on collision and all but 1 survive you should count yourselves lucky - not trying to assign blame to the car manufacturer for not providing shoulder/lap belts.  If safety was such a huge concern to them, they should have bought a vehicle that had shoulder/lap belts (the article mentions other manufacturers were doing this). I'm sure (even though it does not mention it) they sued the other vehicle - is this not enough? must everybody pay? if they go to court and win the only losers will be the consumers who buy mazda products as the cost of the lawsuit will be passed on to them. I wish this country would put a stop to frivolous lawsuits.

 

http://www.detnews.com/article/20110223/AUTO01/102230407/1361/Court...

What are your opinions on this.

[J.B]

Lisa am I reading that even they was not a requirement, and was not installed.   Could this be done on a 1965 chevy.   I think they just had front belts

[Lisa O'Brien]

There are place that retro fit older cars:

Sources for generic kits meeting federal standards:
• J.C. Whitney: lap-shoulder belt with retractor,
$129.99: www.jcwhitney.com.
• E-Z-On Products lap-shoulder belt with
retractor, model 48-R: www.ezonpro.com or
800-323-6598 (call for distributor location)

 

[J.B]

yes but on classic cars that would take their value away

[Lisa O'Brien]

Probably - I have a 67' Cutlass in storage - i think it had lap belts it the front and back seats.

[J.B]

Not when you add things that was not standard equip.  So I think by that judgement you could apply it to older cars.  That is bull

[Sweater Cows!]

What a load of crap.

 

A blogger I used to read down in mexico wrote about how years back there were billboards for lawyers all over. Then after the kind of suits we get here in the USA lost some people some money and then lawyers "disappeared" there are no more ads for the lawyers. hmm....

[XLFD]

On the face of it, it seems a ridiculous lawsuit.  Being found unanimous in the Supreme Court that the litigant has the right to sue means little more than that, and still means that they have a lot to show in how Mazda was negligent in the accident. 

[Lisa O'Brien]

By allowing frivolous lawsuits it eats up tax payers money. It is a waste of the courts time to hear crap such as this.

[J.B]

Well what about AZ   a rancher held 35 until Ice got them and took them back to Mexico.  I think 15 got a couple lawyers here to sue him now he owes each one 65,000 for the stress he caused them.    What about the stupid jury and judge

[Lisa O'Brien]

http://mexicans-go-home.com/roger-barnett/

The above link discusses his case, it is currently under appeal. He does NOT owe them $65,000 each. But this is an example of a case that should have never been allowed to go to trail. Plain and simple the were here illegally and they were trespassing on his property.

[Willy]

There is only one reason our borders are not secured at Mexico and that reason has kept the Democrats as well as Republicans from enforcing immigration laws. That reason is Mexican oil. Mexico has threatenedd to cut off the supply to the U.S. if we crack down to hard on illegals, so the U.S. must play a game of charade to appease the Mexican Government.

[Lisa O'Brien]

Just for that reason alone - I'm all for looking for alternative fuels, energy, etc... I think it would be a beautiful thing if the United States was not dependent on any other Country for anything, completely self reliant. The games would have to come to an end. Unfortunately I never see that happening, we as Americans are too caught up with the material things in life and they all require gas or electricity.