• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Costco can't move "I slipped on a slurpee" lawsuit

Mathematician said:
Your first sentence emphasizes that some seniors should not be trying to walk around.

Do I have sympathy for someone who gets hurt? Usually, I do. However, I'm going to lose a little (if not all) of that sympathy when they try to blame someone else when they could have prevented it themselves without having to take any major precautions.
Click to expand...

That post was a rib (we have fine like that. lol) towards Jerry. Are you under the impression that I do not feel seniors should be able to walk around freely? If so? Read my other post and get back to me.
 
Kali said:
That post was a rib (we have fine like that. lol) towards Jerry. Are you under the impression that I do not feel seniors should be able to walk around freely? If so? Read my other post and get back to me.
Click to expand...

As long as they are on a leash and have their tags its cool w/ me:2razz:
 
AdamT said:
Well, it's a funny thing about peripheral vision: it tends to diminish over time -- especially when someone is in a store looking for something on a shelf that may be at or above her eye level.
Click to expand...

It's common sense that pretty much all senses and bodily functions diminish over time. You have no choice but to live with it. You're helping me make the point that if she has lost ability to avoid a puddle then she needs to have someone taking care of her. Heck, there's a batch of jobs to add to the job market for those unemployed.

You're destined to slip or have some kind of an accident if you walk around staring towards the sky. Furthermore, if you can't monitor your surroundings in more than one direction then you sure as heck have no business driving.
 
AdamT said:
You should print that out and save it for when you're 75 and hobbling around with cataracts in your eyes. I'm sure you'll see the humor in it then.
Click to expand...

When I'm 75 and hobbling around, one of my kids better be looking out for my old ***.
 
Mathematician said:
It's common sense that pretty much all senses and bodily functions diminish over time. You have no choice but to live with it. You're helping me make the point that if she has lost ability to avoid a puddle then she needs to have someone taking care of her. Heck, there's a batch of jobs to add to the job market for those unemployed.

You're destined to slip or have some kind of an accident if you walk around staring towards the sky. Furthermore, if you can't monitor your surroundings in more than one direction then you sure as heck have no business driving.
Click to expand...

I'm making the point that stores know full well that they will have customers young and old, and it is incumbent upon them to provide a reasonably safe premises for all of their customers. Just because someone isn't as nimble as she once was, and doesn't see quite as well, doesn't mean that she should be confined to a nursing home.
 
AdamT said:
I'm making the point that stores know full well that they will have customers young and old, and it is incumbent upon them to provide a reasonably safe premises for all of their customers. Just because someone isn't as nimble as she once was, and doesn't see quite as well, doesn't mean that she should be confined to a nursing home.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying you should stick her in a nursing home. Customers young and old who can't look out for themselves should have someone present who is responsible for them. Customers should know full well that a grocery store or restaurant are locations where spills are likely to occur and should keep an eye out.
 
Well, we're not going to agree on this -- as inconceivable as that may be. ;)

I just don't think it's unreasonable to expect a retail establishment to keep its premises relatively clean and free of clutter. :shrug:
 
Jerry said:
Do you know why Cosco/Sams/Wall-depot/mart/max have electric carts and ****?

Because old ladys don't see **** EVERYONE ELSE sees and avoids, they slip in it, they fall, they sue.

You can't slip and fall if your already sitting in a ****ing cart. DUH!

"Oh look at me I'm in my 'golden years' and I'm independent and I can do whatever I-*whop-splat*".

Better get that Life-Alert!
Click to expand...

I totally lol'd at "whop-splat". :lol:
 
Mathematician said:
Hilarious! It went from heartless to just unrealistic.
Click to expand...

It's heartless because it's so unrealistic. You'd tell an old woman to "watch where she's walking?" She probably doesn't have the physical capacity to do so! It's cruel on so many levels.
 
Guy Incognito said:
It's not bad advice, it's just unrealistic.
Click to expand...

Guy Incognito said:
It's heartless because it's so unrealistic. You'd tell an old woman to "watch where she's walking?" She probably doesn't have the physical capacity to do so! It's cruel on so many levels.
Click to expand...

It's heartless because it's so unrealistic, but it's not bad advice. You're making a heck of a lot of sense! :lamo
 
Mathematician said:
It's heartless because it's so unrealistic, but it's not bad advice. You're making a heck of a lot of sense! :lamo
Click to expand...

Watch where you're going is good advice. It's heartless to tell it to an old lady who is incapable of following it. Is this beginning to sink in?
 
Guy Incognito said:
Watch where you're going is good advice. It's heartless to tell it to an old lady who is incapable of following it. Is this beginning to sink in?
Click to expand...

You're making a pretty big assumption that she was "incapable" of watching where she was stepping, aren't you? Perhaps she was just careless. So often though, people who file these types of lawsuits are not so much interested righting some wrong perpetrated against them, they're just seeking a big payout from a "deep pocket".
 
X Factor said:
You're making a pretty big assumption that she was "incapable" of watching where she was stepping, aren't you? Perhaps she was just careless. So often though, people who file these types of lawsuits are not so much interested righting some wrong perpetrated against them, they're just seeking a big payout from a "deep pocket".
Click to expand...

You can either assume, as you are doing, that this lady is just an opportunist who wasn't really injured and is just looking for a payday, or you can assume as I do that she was a frail elderly woman who was probably physically incapable of avoiding this spill and resultant injuries. Neither of these assumptions is based on a complete assessment of the facts, they are both baseless. However, I think of the two theories mine is more likely.

But really, it isn't for us to decide, it's for the jury.
 
Guy Incognito said:
It's heartless because it's so unrealistic. You'd tell an old woman to "watch where she's walking?" She probably doesn't have the physical capacity to do so! It's cruel on so many levels.
Click to expand...

If she doesn't have the ability to watch where she is going how many spills is she causing running into everything?
 
Guy Incognito said:
You can either assume, as you are doing, that this lady is just an opportunist who wasn't really injured and is just looking for a payday, or you can assume as I do that she was a frail elderly woman who was probably physically incapable of avoiding this spill and resultant injuries. Neither of these assumptions is based on a complete assessment of the facts, they are both baseless. However, I think of the two theories mine is more likely.

But really, it isn't for us to decide, it's for the jury.
Click to expand...

Don't just look at the extreme cases. I think a case in the middle is more likely than either of these. You could assume she was capable of seeing where she was going, was somewhat careless, and is now seeking to cover her financial obligation of medical bills instead of just some big payday. Still, in this case, the accident being due to carelessness on her own part should imply she is responsible for her own medical bills.
 
Last edited:
What should we do with blind people? Confine them to seeing impaired colonies?
 
How many times have ALL of you been walking in a supermarket or a costco or samsclub or kmart or wallyworld or any store like them...and actually walked around the store LOOKING DOWN to see if theres something on the floor you might slip on...are you kidding me lol
These stores are designed for you to walk and look at the shelves not stare at the floor for hazards...I was in samsclub two weeks ago a woman healthy, my age or so was walking pushing the carriage she was slightly in front of me to the left and I just happened to be looking at her when she shot straight down to the ground in front of my carriage...I knelt next to her and asked her not to move until she determined everything was ok...she said my ankle..I looked down and her ankle WAS HUGE she could not stand...so an employee called an ambulance...on the floor where she was walking was cooking oil on the floor..obviously someone dropped a jar and it was poorly cleaned up and she slipped and really turned her ankle...now is that HER FAULT...cmon...thats why they are called accidents.
 
Mathematician said:
Don't just look at the extreme cases. I think a case in the middle is more likely than either of these. You could assume she was capable af seeing where she was going, was somewhat careless, and is now seeking to cover her financial obligation of medical bills instead of just some big payday. Still, in this case, the accident being due to carelessness on her own part should imply she is responsible for her own medical bills.
Click to expand...

How do you know she's seeking a big payday and not just actual damages?
 
Henrin said:
If she doesn't have the ability to watch where she is going how many spills is she causing running into everything?
Click to expand...

I've made this point several times. It's a reasonable guess that she drove herself there. If she can't see where she's going then I better hurry up on those self-driving cars I'm designing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom