My adrenaline got pumping just watching it. I can imagine how the officers felt. That's not the first time officers have shot through a windshield. There are differing opinions about whether or not training should include that, depending on the agency. Much like running a red light or speeding through a residential area, there are risks to both the officer and the public. The officer has to weigh those risks in the moment and decide from there.
What gross incompetence? Were they supposed to predict that a high roller would one day cart in an entire arsenal just to take shots at the country concert across the street? Should they have bulletproofed every window on the offchance this action movie scenario came true?
I agree. I hate that "we have to blame somebody" mentality. I don't think I've ever stayed in a hotel where I couldn't sneak guns in if I wanted, including spare no expense places like the ritz.
Looks like they're doing it more so to have a judge basically rule "MGM didn't do anything wrong here." So then they have that in their back pocket for all the suits coming. Personally, I don't think MGM is wrong in the whole thing. I don't think anyone is to blame, actually, except for the murderous fucker, his girlfriend who had to have known something, and anyone who possibly helped him along the way. But legal and medical bills don't pay for themselves, so might as well sue a big company with a big insurance policy. Because, 'Murica!!
I think there is only one person to blame here, and he’s dead. But I do feel if MGM sues me i would take that stance back.
Yes. If something goes wrong, no matter how hard it was to prevent, you still should have prevented it. Even if actual magic is required to solve the problem, in this world it’s still your fault if it happens. Every lawyer who has ever lived will be happy (even horny) to explain why.
Remember a few weeks ago in Chicago when protesters shut down an interstate and the Superintendent of the CPD was photographed marching arm in arm with the leaders of the protest on the interstate? Do you know what happens when you fail to address bad behavior? You get more of it. Protesters plan to shut down Lake Shore Drive in the middle of rush hour on August 2nd and march to Wrigley Field where a Cubs game is supposed to be starting at 7PM. This could get interesting. Meanwhile, we're 2 days into this week and here's this weeks tally so far:
I have a friend who was sued because someone was bitten by a dog on his grass. Not his dog and person not welcomed on his property. Person was chased by said dog and finally caught up to him on my friend's property. He got sued. Obviously the insurance company he had covered it but that is how fucking ridiculous scum bag lawyers are in this country. That being said, I full expect the hotel, the promoter of the concert, the bands, the LVPD all to be sued at some point because that is just how we roll.
That's Litigation 101. Name EVERYONE in the lawsuit, no matter how tenuously connected to the events, and rack up huge fees helping the courts sort it out. Some entity or other will eventually settle and provide a payday.
That's also why the gun manufacturers are usually named in these cases. They have a lot of insurance money.
There is a phrase for the law or type of law that allows you to sue everyone related to the crime in question. Can someone help me out with this word or phrase? I learned about it when I was bartending, because Alabama is a state where you are able to sue everyone up and down the chain in a DUI. For example, if your family member was killed in a DUI, you could sue the person who performed the DUI, their family especially if they are under age) the bartenders where the person obtained their alcohol, the owner of the restaurant, and on and on.
So what's your actual point? But it is good to know that protesters in Chicago are ruining your day down in Vegas.
Someone who has a better memory than me repped it to me. They are called dram shop laws. These are specifically related to alcohol though. Chain of causation may be the broader legal term for everyone related to a crime. On the one hand, it really sucks being the victim of a crime and not having any recourse because the person in question has no money or insurance to cover what they cause. On the other hand, I think it's extremely unethical to be able to sue so many people unrelated to the event in question. If you can prove that they actually had fault in the particular situation, that's different.
The 9th Circuit just took another step back from the lunatic fringe. What a few welcome surprises from them recently, at least hopefully. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...in-public-idUSKBN1KE28C?utm_source=reddit.com It’s more likely that they would rather rule on it than have SCOTUS do it so the 9th circuit can overturn it at some point. It would be funny if it was deliberately appealed up to the SC by pro-2A people just to have them rule on it anyway. SCOTUS ruling on it would effectively make all states “shall-issue.”
Yeah so Hawaii hasn't issued a concealed carry permit since 2000. It's high time they get their heads out of their asses. What's the phrase, "an armed society is a polite society"?
A fucking Ontario human rights complaint. For being a barber who only knows how to cut men’s hair. Im sick of this “I want to be in your club no matter what” bullshit. Go to a goddamn salon, or I’m working out at Curves tomorrow and you had better give me a membership. It’s my “right”. Somebody set this woman on fire, please: https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/canad...r-defends-refusing-haircut-to-woman-1.4028473
Considering that misgendering someone is a hate crime in Canada now, I guess this isn't too far out of bounds in that context.