Kimo Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 It doesn't really matter who was at fault...the NTSB will rule on it and can (and will) reverse the ruling. Unless both aircraft involved in the midair were flying IFR (and thus the contoller's responsibility), then it would be the overtaking pilot's fault. Tomorrow when Im not so tired I'll type up the actual text from the Federal Air Regulations and we'll see how it was the controller's fault. Maybe, but if the two pilots were in visual meterological conditions, it is still their responsibility to see and avoid traffic even if they were flying IFR (they would share responsibility with the controller). Since the only details I know are those posted above, I don't know enough to say other than I cannot imagine how one could legitimately blame the pilot with the gear problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kjl Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 I blame trial lawyers and their thirst for money, and their ability to convince the lay public that anytime anything bad happens to anyone, someone else must be at fault. I don't blame the plaintiffs - usually. I disagree. I blame the public, and not the trial lawyers. I think we've bred a pretty unhealthy sense of entitlement in America. Even when we recognize our faults in our need to blame others, we still don't blame ourselves; we blame the lawyers. If it was really the trial lawyers that convinced people that someone else is at fault, it means the plaintiffs are completely spineless or exceedingly stupid. I disagree; I think they are greedy and think that the system owes them something. If you want to trade in your car and somebody "convinces" you to get in a fake accident and participate in insurance fraud and you agree to it, that's your fault, not his fault for corrupting you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimo Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 I disagree. I blame the public, and not the trial lawyers. I think we've bred a pretty unhealthy sense of entitlement in America. Even when we recognize our faults in our need to blame others, we still don't blame ourselves; we blame the lawyers.If it was really the trial lawyers that convinced people that someone else is at fault, it means the plaintiffs are completely spineless or exceedingly stupid. I disagree; I think they are greedy and think that the system owes them something. If you want to trade in your car and somebody "convinces" you to get in a fake accident and participate in insurance fraud and you agree to it, that's your fault, not his fault for corrupting you. It's both their faults. The problem is that it's not all lawyers and it's not all the public. It's probably a relatively small percent. These people should be weeded out and eliminated (from the system) and that's the job of the courts and they're not doing it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Gendzwill Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Ridiculous lawsuit of the week, so far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Allee Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 In Bakersfield there was a mall shooting recently. A gang scumbag (scumbag A) shot another gang scumbag (scumbag B). Now the family of scumbag B is suing the owners of the mall because, obviously, if they had provided enough security there would be no shooting. Who was at fault? The Mall owner. Who wasn't sued? The guy who pulled the trigger, because he has no money. The only good thing to come out of this BS is that there's one less social problem roaming the streets. My great money making scheme ... is to round up all the gangs in a certain area, rent the biggest local stadium I can find, and sell tickets so the public can watch these guys beat each other to death with a variety of weapons, excluding guns which are too quick and painless. It would be a travelling roadshow, coming soon to a town near you. The gang problem is eliminated. The public is kept safe and has a fine old night out. And I'd be bloody rich. Hey, it worked for the Romans... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kimo Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Allee, do you think I could get some season tickets? Luxury suite maybe? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.T. Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Fin, Thanks for keeping us informed. Please let the community know if there is anything we can to help as the lawsuit proceeds. Dustin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jon Dahl Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 I think we've bred a pretty unhealthy sense of entitlement in America. This sense of entitlement is the last step in the downfall of a democracy. Next up, a dictatorial sort of government! What form I'm not sure of, but there will be something next to "protect us" from ourselves. Sorry for the o.t. but this is the rule of the past, and we should learn lessons from the past, or it will come back to bite us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 My great money making scheme ... is to round up all the gangs in a certain area, rent the biggest local stadium I can find, and sell tickets so the public can watch these guys beat each other to death with a variety of weapons, excluding guns which are too quick and painless. It would be a travelling roadshow, coming soon to a town near you. The gang problem is eliminated. The public is kept safe and has a fine old night out. And I'd be bloody rich. Hey, it worked for the Romans... thing is, most of those lowlife scumbags simply can not fight. Most of them couldnt punch their way out of a wet paper bag. I've hung around plenty of "toughs" including gangs and only a small percentage knew jack **** about how to fight. But yeah, give em some lead pipes, etc...let em all go at it. but then..the winners? FLAMETHROWER or AK47 style BYE BYE LOSERS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin A. Posted July 21, 2006 Report Share Posted July 21, 2006 Maybe, but if the two pilots were in visual meterological conditions, it is still their responsibility to see and avoid traffic even if they were flying IFR (they would share responsibility with the controller). Since the only details I know are those posted above, I don't know enough to say other than I cannot imagine how one could legitimately blame the pilot with the gear problem. True about the VFR conditions. It is all still ridiculous that it was left to a "jury of peers" to decide rather than the NTSB. ________ TOYOTA MANUFACTURING UK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted July 21, 2006 Report Share Posted July 21, 2006 no more ridiculous than an individual suing the company that sold him equipment that they didnt even manufacture. shame on you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Dold Posted July 21, 2006 Report Share Posted July 21, 2006 It doesn't really matter who was at fault...the NTSB will rule on it and can (and will) reverse the ruling. Unless both aircraft involved in the midair were flying IFR (and thus the contoller's responsibility), then it would be the overtaking pilot's fault. Tomorrow when Im not so tired I'll type up the actual text from the Federal Air Regulations and we'll see how it was the controller's fault.Justin, you make a lot of sense which makes the outcome of the suit even more frustrating, at least from what I've read. The NTSB is so slow that they probably hadn't made a decision by the time the case went to trial. Maybe that's what you mean about reversal, but I don't know how the case could be re-tried. On an appeal maybe? It's in the system, CHI97FA218A, here's the probable cause: The National Transportation Safety Board determines the probable cause(s) of this accident as follows: the pilots not maintaining visual separation between their airplanes. A factor in this accident was the pilot of the southbound airplane not reporting her position abeam the airport as directed by the ATC controller. Ken's right, juries are at least half responsible for this failed system. I'm not sure how they get this way when theoretically two attorneys are making arguments. Maybe people are just compassionate by nature and want to see ""victims" taken care of. http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief.asp?ev_id=20001208X08309&key=1 http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/GenPDF.asp?id=CHI97FA218A&rpt=fa http://www.ntsb.gov/ntsb/brief2.asp?ev_id=20001208X08309&ntsbno=CHI97FA218A&akey=1 Hey Hugh, long time no talk! I just got engaged! The best part is that she wants to honeymoon snowboarding in CO! How could I get this lucky? Here's why the sig: http://home.surewest.net/sdold/music/music.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skatha Posted July 21, 2006 Report Share Posted July 21, 2006 Texas passed a tort reform bill, which has greatly reduced the number of med-mal cases...to make up for the shortfall in revenues, lawyers are going after the next "deep pocket" buffet-Legal malpractice(no joke, this is according to my lawyer, who now has 90% of his business legal malpractice defense)! The solution to the problem is seen in other countries... 1. contingency fees are considered to be unethical in every other western legal system-get rid of 'em. I had to pay a retainer to get divorced, plantiffs for tort actions should pay a retainer, too. The lawyer can waive the retainer in the interest of justice if he thinks his client can't afford it, but he can't get to claim 60% of the award, either 2. Juries for tort actions are ridiculous. A jury of my peers in a med-mal case would be a bunch of docs, most of whom would keep in mind that there is no medical procedure that has a 100% success rate or a medical test that is 100% accurate and that sh*t happens and, by and large, I really do want to help people, not hurt 'em. The UK uses a panel of judges for civil actions and so should we Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D.T. Posted July 21, 2006 Report Share Posted July 21, 2006 It doesn't really matter who was at fault...the NTSB will rule on it and can (and will) reverse the ruling. It is all still ridiculous that it was left to a "jury of peers" to decide rather than the NTSB. There is one part of the equation you have incorrect. The NTSB does not get involved in civil litigation. They simply document the accident and attempt to determine the cause and determine if any actions need to be taken (i.e. defective parts that need to be recalled, additional inspection criteria for similar aircraft, etc...). Only the NTSB Factual Report is allowed to be used in civil litigation. The Factual Report is exactly that, it documents the evidence (pilot experience, aircraft information, flight information, wreckage distribution, etc...). The full Summary Report, which contains the opinions as to the cause of the incident, is not allowed into evidence in the civil case. In the civil litigation, independent experts are hired to perform the reconstruction and opine as to the cause of the accident. It is up to the jury to determine which expert, plaintiff or defense, is most correct. Right? Wrong? That is just how the system works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D-Sub Posted July 21, 2006 Report Share Posted July 21, 2006 guys? Bomber? Lawsuit? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bobdea Posted July 22, 2006 Report Share Posted July 22, 2006 I can't think of many companies that look out for the users of their product nearly as much as bomber and then this happens US law needs a overhaul, hell not just our judicial system the whole government I hope for the best Fin but really this probably won't be the last, people get slapped with frivolus litigation all the time and there are lots of people riding bomber gear, it's alway the 1 in a 1000 guy looking to blame his problem on someone else this case seems like the guy who killed the messenger to me, lame and out for a buck Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jack M Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 We are saddened and alarmed by this discouraging turn of events. The online community of alpine snowboarders, which owes Bomber Industries gratitude for its inception, is what allows the ECES to exist. Therefore, we feel we must do our part and make this small act of support and solidarity. For the first time this past season, the ECES actually turned a small profit (well, not counting the hours that went into planning and working the event). Todd and I have been procrastinating deciding what to do with it, but now the decision is obvious. We are donating <b>$500.00</b>, the bulk of this year's profit, to Bomber's legal defense. We thank everyone involved with the ECES, attendees, helpers, and our generous sponsors alike, for supporting the event and allowing us to make this small gesture. You can all give yourselves a pat on the back for supporting this sport that we all love. If in the future the cancer of this litigious society spreads to other members of this industry, we will be there to help as best we can. Thank you, and see you at the next ECES. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tex1230 Posted July 24, 2006 Report Share Posted July 24, 2006 that's awesome. and very generous. Jack and Todd should be commended for this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Justin A. Posted July 27, 2006 Report Share Posted July 27, 2006 that's awesome. and very generous.Jack and Todd should be commended for this. 10 cool points to jack and todd. They also get to be ahead of D-Sub in the members listing for the rest of forever. ________ VAPORMATIC VAPORIZER Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUD Posted July 31, 2006 Report Share Posted July 31, 2006 I have been following this from the beginning as well...... It is a shame. Fin, I wish you and your company all the luck and please keep us in the loop. It may require a HUGE order to help you out (I will be in the market for both TD's AND Tele's just not enough money yet). Take care, Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trikerdad Posted August 15, 2006 Report Share Posted August 15, 2006 I'd like to help with the defense fund but, I spend all my money paying the doctors and hospitals for treating the numerous injuries I've incurred plying my favorite sport (including 6 broken bones in 15 years). I guess I could sue someone but, I learned as a kid watching cartoons, when you step on a banana peel there are going to be consequences. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnshapiro Posted September 17, 2006 Report Share Posted September 17, 2006 Being new here, but also having been involved (and still involved) in some activities that have the potential for serious injury or death, a level of personal responsibility needs to be taken to help ensure correct operation of equipment. I'm very sorry to hear that this has happened and will endeavor to make future purchases of gear from Bomber. Not just because of the lawsuit, but also because of the service and support that they offer. This is a company that should be supported by the community. Good luck Fin (and the rest of the crew)! I hope it works out well. Please keep us updated. Joel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.