Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

How is this GM's fault?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • How is this GM's fault?

    Amber had put herself at considerable risk on July 29, when her car hit a tree around 4 a.m. in Dentsville, Md. She was not wearing her seatbelt, was legally drunk and had reached 69 miles an hour in a 25 m.p.h. zone just before the crash that killed her, according to a crash report.
    However, Amber's family apparently hit the jackpot against GM in a "confidential settlement," based on the pirate/highwayman theory that the airbag in her 2005 Chevrolet Cobalt failed to deploy. http://autos.yahoo.com/news/general-...024405218.html

    Do we really need the prices of new vehicles and parts inflated to pay for people acting irresponsibly, illegally and stupidly?

  • #2
    Laws are written to protect the consumer from either himself or herself which ever the case might be.

    Years ago Briggs and Straton the makers of lawnmower engines added Easy Spin to every motor they produced because of a law suit.

    Some over weight guy purchased a lawnmower from Sears and when home and tried to start it and died. The solution was Briggs added a 15 thousand bump on the intake lobe of the cam to release the compression so the motor turned over easier. I guess the guys weight and health issues played no roll in his death.

    When a drag racer is killed in a drag strip related crash it's not uncommon for not only the sectioning body and the drag strip owners to be sued but they also sometimes sue every company that has a racing sticker on the car trying to claim that their product might have contributed in some way to the crash.

    It the world we live in today. Jimbo

    Comment


    • #3
      GM used to own Briggs and Stratton... I don't know if they still do, but they did when I played mower. B&S made lock cylinders for the cars. They went to this instead of the bump on the Exhaust



      and people are idiots... the safety bails on current mowers is courtesy of a group of lawyers who tried to trim one of their hedges with a two stroke Lawnboy as the story goes.
      Last edited by Beagle; March 4, 2014, 07:10 AM.
      Flying south, with a flock of bird dogs.

      Comment


      • #4
        meanwhile there is bent fox body mustangs, twisted camaros, and buckled ten geared subarus that never got justice.. owners brains fried to the ABS platic intakes that shed its glass once the thermostat hit 180F while the outside world was below 4F..

        anyway..

        don't even get me started.
        Previously boxer3main
        the death rate and fairy tales cannot kill the nature left behind.

        Comment


        • #5
          Why do people bother to build anything these days? I'd rather build an app that shoots birds at pig houses or lets Aunt Gerty post cat pictures to the internet. Less liability.
          Cheap, slow, half-assed: Pick three

          Comment


          • #6
            Yes, there is no reason to build anything, because you can be sued by complete idiots and their attorneys regardless of how stupid they were. Remember this if you are impaneled on a jury for a products liability case, or premises liability case, or what ever theory they come up with. Until we as a people ask our legislatures to change these laws these situations will only get worse. Everyone hopes for their turn at the lawsuit lottery.
            Drag Week 2006 & 2012 - Winner Street Race Big Block Naturally Aspirated - R/U 2007 Broke DW '05 and Drag Weekend '15 Coincidence?

            Comment


            • #7
              I think its GM fault because the ignition switch has a fault that doesn't energize the air bag system. But the tree,speed and impaired driver could have contributed more than the lack of air bag.

              Comment


              • #8
                It doesn't matter the circumstances of the accident and what the driver did, a key safety feature of the car did not work as it should have and that is on GM's hands. If the airbag would have deployed the person may still be alive.
                The Green Machine.
                http://s1.postimg.org/40t9i583j/mytruck.jpg

                Comment


                • #9
                  ...and they knew it.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Too damn many lawyers in this country.......that's what wrong
                    Long Haul Gang 2011,12,13,14,15,16,17,19
                    The older I get The Faster I was!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Big Dave View Post
                      Too damn many lawyers in this country.......that's what wrong
                      Yeah, I hate waiting in line to get into the courthouse . . . .

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by BigAL View Post
                        It doesn't matter the circumstances of the accident and what the driver did, a key safety feature of the car did not work as it should have and that is on GM's hands. If the airbag would have deployed the person may still be alive.
                        Geebers, TC, do you really think an airbag would have saved that dopey hop-head kid when she slammed into a freakin' tree at 70 m.p.h.?

                        Here's the real problem . . . the law in most places is . . . .

                        . . . a distinction must be drawn between use for an abnormal purpose and use for a proper purpose but in a careless manner. The latter use would properly be described as contributory negligence, which is not a defense to manufacturer's products liability cases. Negligence in the use of a product does not bar recovery under this tort even though the negligence "contributed" to the accident.
                        In other words, the pirate/ambulance-chaser/jackpot justice trial lawyer Cretans representing the "estate" of the "driving-while-blind" speed demon dead girl would have likely been successful in keeping the uninformed "citizens" in the jury box from even hearing about what really caused the accident . . . .

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Which is why the laws on this need to be changed in my view, bankrupting companies to find a deep pocket for injured folks sounds good until the jobs are all gone. Remember Blitz, they used to sell plastic gas cans at Pep Boys and the like. Sued out of existance because idiots set themselves on fire and their conrtibutory negligence (e.g. smoking while filling the can) didn't relieve the company from liability. When bad things happen somebody has to pay is the mantra. Sorry state of affairs IMV.

                          There is a saying in the legal profession that bad facts make for bad law and that is where we find ourselves now as personal responsibility is not part of the conversation anymore. For another example look at the group of mothers who are suing the automakers for not having rear view cameras and braking systems in the cars they bought after they ran over their own kids. Mothers Against Personal Responsibility would be my name for them, I think they call themselves something else.

                          Those who would heap blame on GM with scant understanding of the facts are part of the problem, but it's your opinion and your are entitled to it, just hope you or your employer don't go belly up for similar reasons.
                          Drag Week 2006 & 2012 - Winner Street Race Big Block Naturally Aspirated - R/U 2007 Broke DW '05 and Drag Weekend '15 Coincidence?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Well said, Bill!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by CDMBill View Post
                              For another example look at the group of mothers who are suing the automakers for not having rear view cameras and braking systems in the cars they bought after they ran over their own kids. Mothers Against Personal Responsibility would be my name for them,

                              No friggin kidding, zero personal responsibilty from that lady. I can tell you for certain from watching my Mom drive a new fully loaded Cadillac that she has the car in reverse and moving before the screen clicks over to the camera and starts showing stuff. Sure she looks over her shoulder and in the mirrors like she has done for a couple dozen years, but my point is, the camera's won't stop people from backing over stuff or people. Like all conviences, once the novelty has worn off it will be dutifully ignored most the time because the expectation of nothing behind them is still the mind set.
                              Last edited by TheSilverBuick; March 5, 2014, 09:43 AM.
                              Escaped on a technicality.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X