• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.

What is wrong with this picture?

New posts
:rolling: ...John R, you are on fire!!!
 
I am not sure how I feel about this either. While the boys were trespassing , they were not there for any mischief or violence. I believe the company should have warnings stating extreme danger. I sure would not want my son to be severly maimed due to a stupid mistake and stupid judgement. Who among us has not done similliar things? Did we expect to be severly damaged as a result? Would we have done them if we had been warned of danger? :idontno:
 
Whenever I see a judgement like this I wish there was an automatic appeal to Judge Judy's court. In fact, I was hoping Bush had nominated her to the Supreme Court. BSmart, why don't you bring it up in school and let me know if it is constitutional:roll:
 
Whenever I see a judgement like this I wish there was an automatic appeal to Judge Judy's court. In fact, I was hoping Bush had nominated her to the Supreme Court. BSmart, why don't you bring it up in school and let me know if it is constitutional:roll:
I am not saying they should have been awarded the huge amount that they were...but I do believe that there should have been plenty of warning. :idontno:
 
Last edited:
im with you john...they were tresspassing...why would you need a sign if no one is supposed to be there in the first place...How could the train company have forseen that as a potential liability?:idontno:
 
seriously, anyone who lives near any electric trains knows how they work. any trainyard has tresspassing and danger warnings. anyone who climbs up on a train car is practicing "assumption of the risk". any 17 year old person on top of a train car is up to no good.
 
Last edited:
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter












                               
Back
Top