Agree said it, \” It wasn\’t an \”Act of God.\” It was negligience.\” Agree\’s bias is right out there. Doesn\’t the possibility of an accident occur to you? Must someone always be negligent? An old lady spills coffee on herself and it is the fault of the person who made the coffee.
Come on – get real! You are the type who will always find someone else to blame for anything that happens. Many scenarios can be made about what happened. A wake from another boat, everyone going to one side of the boat to see something pointed out by the operator, \”old\” standards of how much the average person weighs. Now who is to blame? The bottom-feeding lawyers are getting their cut of any settlement – and they care not who gets sued, just as long as they win.
It is an unfortunate tragedy that the boat overturned and lives were lost, but the lwayers are jumping in there suing everyone in site. Why not sue the survivors for participating in the apparent overloading of the boat. Didn\’t they know there were too many people on the boat already?
The boat met the legal standards of the Coast Guard and New York – standards that are now being changed but that were met by the boatowner at the time of the accident. If two such entities tell you your boat can carry 50 people, you will believe the \”experts\”.
It was unfortunate, but it was an accident. Nothing is guaranteed when it comes to safety – you do the best you can with the information you have.
It is indeed just that, an accident. It is a shame to me that, in today\’s society, you can sue for anything. Anything at all. And in most cases, you can win. I just don\’t get it. It is my opinion that the lawyers representing these selfish acts of greed should be disbarred for taking advantage of the misfortune of another. You have just lost a loved one and the only thing you can think of is sueing for money. UNBELIEVABLE.
Can the attorney sue the wind or the molecules of water? How about the maker of the fuel that powered the boat? Maybe the manufacturer of the cloth that was in the canopy. How about the wave that knocked over the boat?
If the lawyers for the plaintiffs can prove negligence on the part of the parties that are being sued, does that mean the survivors are still \”greedy\”.
If your mother or grandmother was killed due to improper operation of the boat, would you just shrug your shoulders and say \”oh, it was an accident, too bad, so sad?\”
Sometimes it is not about money. The families of the victims could have many motives besides greed. Maybe they want to know exactly how and why their loved ones died. Maybe they want to prevent someone else from dying the same way.
Why do you automatically assume they are \”greedy\”? You might feel very differently about this matter if you were in the a similar situation.
I agree with logical. How can you reasonably expect the survivors and the victims\’ families NOT to sue? One or more parties to this accident were negligient. Ipso facto.
Every party to this incident says they are not to blame… how can they all be right? It wasn\’t an \”Act of God.\” It was negligience.
Coxwain, how do you know one or more of the parties were not negligent? Just because they said so? Are you that naive? Of course everyone is going to deny responsibility. If you weren\’t there, you have no idea what happened. As I said previously, you or some others posting here, would feel very different if your loved one was lost. Don\’t be so quick to judge others until you have been in their shoes.
The article showed that \”after investigation\” they found no negligence. So why are we still talking about negligence?
I wish our legal system would change. The lawyers are the only ones who win. Even groundless suits get money to make them go away. How about everyone is allowed to sue the lawyers for groundless suits? I like that. Maybe they wouldn;t be so quick to run to court.
Hey, we forgot the food industry who made the people over the 140lb average weight that the Coast Guard was basing its capacity on. Maybe they should have been sued too.
None of you have any connection with the 20 who died in the Ethan Allen, nor the 27 who survived the horror of it all. If anyone of you had relatives involved in any of it, dead or alive, you would be jumping all over the sheriff who made it possible for the captain of the boat, not to go to jail for neglicence, since he just smelled his breath and said that he was not going to prefer any charges.
In this case the \”Law\” \”Failed\”. When the law fails, those unfortunate survivors of the disaster and relatives of the deceased, have to have some recourse to make those responsible for their actions or lack of action, \”pay\”.
So they hire the so-greedy attorneys, to do those people, and hurt them financially, simply, because it is the only course of action left.
To those of you, who called it an accident, read your dictionary. An accident is an occurence where no one is at fault. In the case of the Ethan Allen, there are number of variables involved in that boat going down–over weight, poor maintenance, no observer on the craft, poor center of gravity. You figure it out! It was not an accident!
I did bother to check my dictionary (and several others on-line) and none that I found said anything about no one being at fault. Basically, here is what an accident is defined as (and we ALL know this is what an accident is):
An unexpected and undesirable event, especially one resulting in damage or harm.
An unforeseen incident.
Lack of intention.
You are using emotionally loaded arguments that don\’t really hold any water.
An unexpected and undesirable event, especially one resulting in damage or harm.
An unforeseen incident
If you and I are running on a city sidewalk, you are running east to west, and I am running south to north, and you can\’t see anything past the buildings unitl you come to the corner and I, the same. Also, we are the same distance from the corner and running at the same speed and we run into each other. Is that an accident? No! Was it unexpected? No! Was it an undesirable event? Yes, but no! Because you and I had control of our speed and observation of coming to a corner, not knowing what might be coming the other way. Was it unforseen? No! Because we are thinking intelligent animals, we should have had the forethought of futuristic events that may occur as a result of our actions.
Now let me tell you what an accident is not.
I drove a school bus for one summer. I went from point to point to pick up school children. Before I could be licensed for this, I had to pass an inspection by an individual who did the certification. He and I were on the bus alone. He had me drive throughout the route that I would take, everyday, to pick up the children. At each real stop, he asked me what I would do at that point, even to the stop of a handicapped child. He certified me. Before he left, he inspired me with a simple, yet, a life informative message. “Every time you take this bus out, take it out as if it is your very first time. Remember, that you have the safety and lives of the children in your hands. Never become complacent with your regular routine, because it distracts you from awareness of what is happening all around you, and the children you have in your care. If you don’t know anything about engines or brakes, then educate yourself, because you are the one operating the bus with the responsibility of children on it. If anything goes wrong, you are responsible. Don’t depend on the mechanics, because they are not the ones driving the bus, you are. Finally, if you apply the brakes to stop for a red light and a brake line bursts, and you can’t stop and get hit by an oncoming car or truck and children are injured, you are responsible.”
Now let me tell you about a veteran bus driver in Arlington Heights, Illinois. He drove the school bus for years without incident. There was one area, where he had to cross commuter train tracks. On the other side of the tracks there was a traffic light, which only allowed for two cars to stop, and then the tracks and then the other side. The driver followed too close one day, and the car in front of him decided to stop at an amber light instead of proceeding through. Had that car proceeded, it would have been enough room for the bus to be in a safe area when a commuter train went through, however, there was only enough room for three quarters of the bus. When the safety gates went down, the driver tried to back up and go around the other side but it was too late. The train hit the bus. Well, I don’t have to speak of what happened after that. The fact is that he didn’t stop in front of the tracks, which all school buses are supposed to do. He had traveled that route everyday, and became complacent, by just driving over the tracks as everyone else did. But on that particular day, he failed..‗Complacency?”
My father taught us electricity, plumbing, carpentry, masonry and roofing. The most important thing that he emphasized was “Safety First. Get to know all of the machinery you are using, and even if you use it a hundred times, use it as if it were your very first time. If you come across a situation that you are unfamiliar, then educate yourself and practice beforehand.”
Mr. Paris became complacent. He may have taken the Ethan Allen out one or two times before, but my guess, is that he was complacent as always. He took the boat out, without the mandatory second personnel. He never approached the craft as if it were his very first time. Because it was out one or two times before, it was fine to take it out a second or third time. If Mr. Paris was such a veteran, then he should have known his boat. The sound of the engines, the list of the craft with or without people on it, whether the bilge pumps and coolant pumps were working properly, and finally was there water down below. He did not inspect it before he took the boat on tour with people on it crammed like sardines in a tin can. He did not take the time over his many years of experience to inspect the craft before he began each tour, and he finally paid the ultimate price. He was complacent and ignorant of the faultiness of the boat. However, that does not excuse him for the deaths of 20 people, because he was the Captain in charge, with or without a second assistant on board.
The owner of the company is responsible for not having mechanics or technicians inspect every boat before it takes people on tour.
So now, I ask you, \”Was it unexpected? Yes. Was it unforseen? Yes. Was it an undesirable event? Yes.\” This is correct, because the Boat Company owner and the captain were not futuristic in their day to day operations to understand prevention of tragedy. That is the very reason why the Fire Departments practice Fire Drills–to prevent people from being harmed–in case of fire. Is this futuristic? Of course. Then why not the operation of the Ethatn Allen.
That is why I say it is not an accident, because someone had control. If a rock falls from space and hits your roof, it is an accident, because no one has control. When the human factor is involved in anykind of action, someone has control and there is no Accident.
Agree said it, \” It wasn\’t an \”Act of God.\” It was negligience.\” Agree\’s bias is right out there. Doesn\’t the possibility of an accident occur to you? Must someone always be negligent? An old lady spills coffee on herself and it is the fault of the person who made the coffee.
Come on – get real! You are the type who will always find someone else to blame for anything that happens. Many scenarios can be made about what happened. A wake from another boat, everyone going to one side of the boat to see something pointed out by the operator, \”old\” standards of how much the average person weighs. Now who is to blame? The bottom-feeding lawyers are getting their cut of any settlement – and they care not who gets sued, just as long as they win.
It is an unfortunate tragedy that the boat overturned and lives were lost, but the lwayers are jumping in there suing everyone in site. Why not sue the survivors for participating in the apparent overloading of the boat. Didn\’t they know there were too many people on the boat already?
The boat met the legal standards of the Coast Guard and New York – standards that are now being changed but that were met by the boatowner at the time of the accident. If two such entities tell you your boat can carry 50 people, you will believe the \”experts\”.
It was unfortunate, but it was an accident. Nothing is guaranteed when it comes to safety – you do the best you can with the information you have.
it could be that the passengers crowded to one side to see something. i have seen that almost happen when fishing.
It is indeed just that, an accident. It is a shame to me that, in today\’s society, you can sue for anything. Anything at all. And in most cases, you can win. I just don\’t get it. It is my opinion that the lawyers representing these selfish acts of greed should be disbarred for taking advantage of the misfortune of another. You have just lost a loved one and the only thing you can think of is sueing for money. UNBELIEVABLE.
Can the attorney sue the wind or the molecules of water? How about the maker of the fuel that powered the boat? Maybe the manufacturer of the cloth that was in the canopy. How about the wave that knocked over the boat?
Greedy greedy greedy
If the lawyers for the plaintiffs can prove negligence on the part of the parties that are being sued, does that mean the survivors are still \”greedy\”.
If your mother or grandmother was killed due to improper operation of the boat, would you just shrug your shoulders and say \”oh, it was an accident, too bad, so sad?\”
Sometimes it is not about money. The families of the victims could have many motives besides greed. Maybe they want to know exactly how and why their loved ones died. Maybe they want to prevent someone else from dying the same way.
Why do you automatically assume they are \”greedy\”? You might feel very differently about this matter if you were in the a similar situation.
I agree with logical. How can you reasonably expect the survivors and the victims\’ families NOT to sue? One or more parties to this accident were negligient. Ipso facto.
Every party to this incident says they are not to blame… how can they all be right? It wasn\’t an \”Act of God.\” It was negligience.
Coxwain, how do you know one or more of the parties were not negligent? Just because they said so? Are you that naive? Of course everyone is going to deny responsibility. If you weren\’t there, you have no idea what happened. As I said previously, you or some others posting here, would feel very different if your loved one was lost. Don\’t be so quick to judge others until you have been in their shoes.
The article showed that \”after investigation\” they found no negligence. So why are we still talking about negligence?
I wish our legal system would change. The lawyers are the only ones who win. Even groundless suits get money to make them go away. How about everyone is allowed to sue the lawyers for groundless suits? I like that. Maybe they wouldn;t be so quick to run to court.
Hey, we forgot the food industry who made the people over the 140lb average weight that the Coast Guard was basing its capacity on. Maybe they should have been sued too.
None of you have any connection with the 20 who died in the Ethan Allen, nor the 27 who survived the horror of it all. If anyone of you had relatives involved in any of it, dead or alive, you would be jumping all over the sheriff who made it possible for the captain of the boat, not to go to jail for neglicence, since he just smelled his breath and said that he was not going to prefer any charges.
In this case the \”Law\” \”Failed\”. When the law fails, those unfortunate survivors of the disaster and relatives of the deceased, have to have some recourse to make those responsible for their actions or lack of action, \”pay\”.
So they hire the so-greedy attorneys, to do those people, and hurt them financially, simply, because it is the only course of action left.
To those of you, who called it an accident, read your dictionary. An accident is an occurence where no one is at fault. In the case of the Ethan Allen, there are number of variables involved in that boat going down–over weight, poor maintenance, no observer on the craft, poor center of gravity. You figure it out! It was not an accident!
I did bother to check my dictionary (and several others on-line) and none that I found said anything about no one being at fault. Basically, here is what an accident is defined as (and we ALL know this is what an accident is):
An unexpected and undesirable event, especially one resulting in damage or harm.
An unforeseen incident.
Lack of intention.
You are using emotionally loaded arguments that don\’t really hold any water.
Ray,
I am using your definition of an accident.
An unexpected and undesirable event, especially one resulting in damage or harm.
An unforeseen incident
If you and I are running on a city sidewalk, you are running east to west, and I am running south to north, and you can\’t see anything past the buildings unitl you come to the corner and I, the same. Also, we are the same distance from the corner and running at the same speed and we run into each other. Is that an accident? No! Was it unexpected? No! Was it an undesirable event? Yes, but no! Because you and I had control of our speed and observation of coming to a corner, not knowing what might be coming the other way. Was it unforseen? No! Because we are thinking intelligent animals, we should have had the forethought of futuristic events that may occur as a result of our actions.
Now let me tell you what an accident is not.
I drove a school bus for one summer. I went from point to point to pick up school children. Before I could be licensed for this, I had to pass an inspection by an individual who did the certification. He and I were on the bus alone. He had me drive throughout the route that I would take, everyday, to pick up the children. At each real stop, he asked me what I would do at that point, even to the stop of a handicapped child. He certified me. Before he left, he inspired me with a simple, yet, a life informative message. “Every time you take this bus out, take it out as if it is your very first time. Remember, that you have the safety and lives of the children in your hands. Never become complacent with your regular routine, because it distracts you from awareness of what is happening all around you, and the children you have in your care. If you don’t know anything about engines or brakes, then educate yourself, because you are the one operating the bus with the responsibility of children on it. If anything goes wrong, you are responsible. Don’t depend on the mechanics, because they are not the ones driving the bus, you are. Finally, if you apply the brakes to stop for a red light and a brake line bursts, and you can’t stop and get hit by an oncoming car or truck and children are injured, you are responsible.”
Now let me tell you about a veteran bus driver in Arlington Heights, Illinois. He drove the school bus for years without incident. There was one area, where he had to cross commuter train tracks. On the other side of the tracks there was a traffic light, which only allowed for two cars to stop, and then the tracks and then the other side. The driver followed too close one day, and the car in front of him decided to stop at an amber light instead of proceeding through. Had that car proceeded, it would have been enough room for the bus to be in a safe area when a commuter train went through, however, there was only enough room for three quarters of the bus. When the safety gates went down, the driver tried to back up and go around the other side but it was too late. The train hit the bus. Well, I don’t have to speak of what happened after that. The fact is that he didn’t stop in front of the tracks, which all school buses are supposed to do. He had traveled that route everyday, and became complacent, by just driving over the tracks as everyone else did. But on that particular day, he failed..‗Complacency?”
My father taught us electricity, plumbing, carpentry, masonry and roofing. The most important thing that he emphasized was “Safety First. Get to know all of the machinery you are using, and even if you use it a hundred times, use it as if it were your very first time. If you come across a situation that you are unfamiliar, then educate yourself and practice beforehand.”
Mr. Paris became complacent. He may have taken the Ethan Allen out one or two times before, but my guess, is that he was complacent as always. He took the boat out, without the mandatory second personnel. He never approached the craft as if it were his very first time. Because it was out one or two times before, it was fine to take it out a second or third time. If Mr. Paris was such a veteran, then he should have known his boat. The sound of the engines, the list of the craft with or without people on it, whether the bilge pumps and coolant pumps were working properly, and finally was there water down below. He did not inspect it before he took the boat on tour with people on it crammed like sardines in a tin can. He did not take the time over his many years of experience to inspect the craft before he began each tour, and he finally paid the ultimate price. He was complacent and ignorant of the faultiness of the boat. However, that does not excuse him for the deaths of 20 people, because he was the Captain in charge, with or without a second assistant on board.
The owner of the company is responsible for not having mechanics or technicians inspect every boat before it takes people on tour.
So now, I ask you, \”Was it unexpected? Yes. Was it unforseen? Yes. Was it an undesirable event? Yes.\” This is correct, because the Boat Company owner and the captain were not futuristic in their day to day operations to understand prevention of tragedy. That is the very reason why the Fire Departments practice Fire Drills–to prevent people from being harmed–in case of fire. Is this futuristic? Of course. Then why not the operation of the Ethatn Allen.
That is why I say it is not an accident, because someone had control. If a rock falls from space and hits your roof, it is an accident, because no one has control. When the human factor is involved in anykind of action, someone has control and there is no Accident.
Konert
Ronald Zdrojewski