Family sues Airport when stowaway falls from plane - Page 3
+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 28 of 28
Like Tree10Likes

Thread: Family sues Airport when stowaway falls from plane

  1. #21
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    7,272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GloriaInTX View Post
    But in that case I'm pretty the girl had a right to be in the pool and wasn't performing a criminal act to be there.
    Right. But if we got rid of the monetary awards, she wouldn't be able to collect for her bodily injury.

  2. #22
    Community Host Alissa_Sal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Debating Away on the Debate Board!
    Posts
    11,771

    Default

    To me, the security breach and the kid falling are kind of two separate issues. They should definitely investigate the security breach to make sure that the airport is safe from terrorists and the like. Having said that, I don't like the idea that people can be held liable for other people's express stupidity simply because they didn't stop them. Like, if you came to my house and climbed out on my roof, fell off, and died, do you really think that your family should be able to sue me because I didn't know you were up there and let you die? I don't. It would be one thing if I had expressly agreed to watch you and be responsible for you and then didn't watch you, but if not, I think the blame should lie on you for doing something dumb that just happened to involve my property.
    -Alissa, mom to Tristan (5) and Reid (the baby!)

    Got an opinion? We've got a board! Come join us for some lively debate on the Face Off! Debate Arena board.

  3. #23
    Posting Addict ClairesMommy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    12,517

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ethanwinfield View Post
    Without large monetary rewards, companies don't always change their business practices. (e.g., Ford Pinto, tobacco companies) Also, sometimes there are life-long medical bills attached to injury. (Wasn't there a young girl whose suffered serious injuries when the pool drain suction was so severe it caused her intestinal injuries?)
    I do agree with the first part of your post and I think this is also the cause of damage awards increasing exponentially in recent years - that while different levels of court sometimes have a maximum/minimum you can sue for in that particular court, higher levels of court are setting the precedent for hugh monetary penalties (like against tobacco companies, as you said) and those examples are then followed in far more frivolous claims. Yes, in some instances big penalties are needed and serve a bigger purpose than to just bankrupt a company, but then you get the stupid people in life who want to pin the misfortune they brought upon themselves onto another party who's got deep pockets.

  4. #24
    Super Poster
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Jeddah
    Posts
    678

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ethanwinfield View Post
    I find this to be stupid also. Why would one person's stupidity negate another's?

    All I'm saying, is if I were on that jury, I would listen to both sides before passing judgment. Secutiy breaches at an international airport should be that frequent.
    I understand we should not have security breaches but somehow nothing is completely foolproof. We tend to implement better policies along the way.

    And there are other ways to make companies improve besides awarding large sums of money. I said some would have to stay but overall it should not be the norm.
    Last edited by myyams; 11-16-2012 at 02:54 PM. Reason: Gavebbad example
    Aisha

  5. #25
    Posting Addict KimPossible's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Posts
    20,154

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Alissa_Sal View Post
    To me, the security breach and the kid falling are kind of two separate issues. They should definitely investigate the security breach to make sure that the airport is safe from terrorists and the like. Having said that, I don't like the idea that people can be held liable for other people's express stupidity simply because they didn't stop them. Like, if you came to my house and climbed out on my roof, fell off, and died, do you really think that your family should be able to sue me because I didn't know you were up there and let you die? I don't. It would be one thing if I had expressly agreed to watch you and be responsible for you and then didn't watch you, but if not, I think the blame should lie on you for doing something dumb that just happened to involve my property.
    I typed and erased so many times yesterday when trying to answer this question. I kept trying to find away to say the security and his death were separate things. THIS, what you wrote, is what i was trying to say, almost exactly and couldn't find the words for it!
    Alissa_Sal likes this.

  6. #26
    Posting Addict Spacers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    My avatar is the tai chi -- a symbol of the eternal cycle of life
    Posts
    16,511

    Default

    ITA with Alissa about the breach of security. IMHO the result of the security breach was not that the kid fell out over Boston; the real result of the security breach was that the kid had access to the plane. That, in & of itself, is not necessarily a dangerous or life-threatening thing. As others said, it would be more life-threatening to the passengers if he'd placed a bomb. Once he was on the tarmac, I don't see how a nearly-full-grown 16-year-old boy could have been picked out from anyone else if he was wearing appropriate clothing and wasn't acting suspicious. There are always tons of people out there doing their various jobs. The fact is that this kid went even further with his own stupidity (or, perhaps, death wish) by attempting to stow away in the wheel well, and that is what resulted in his death, not the initial security breach. So the liability of the airport police should be very very limited IMHO if this case even goes forward. Which it should not.
    David Letterman is retiring. Such great memories of watching him over the past thirty-two years!

  7. #27
    Posting Addict Rivergallery's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Oregon
    Posts
    9,768

    Default

    He was a criminal and maybe the airport should sue the family for the cost of increasing security.

  8. #28
    Posting Addict
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    7,272

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rivergallery View Post
    He was a criminal and maybe the airport should sue the family for the cost of increasing security.
    I prefer international airlines to be proactive in their security rather than reactive.
    Spacers likes this.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
v -->

About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Sitemap | Terms & Conditions