Could we have some more information on why the parties who will not be able to be sued should have been able to be successfully sued in the first place. Apparently it makes a huge financial difference where and how we leave this earth. Please do not interpret this as a callous attitude towards those who died. I all boils down to individual responsibility. As for the lawyers I don’t think any one lawyer should get more than the lowest payment to the deceased individuals” survivors. Is anybody responsible for themselves anymore?
I have a hard time believing these people will accept $100,000 for a lost child/relative when if campus police had cleared the school grounds after the first two shots/shootings, many if not all of the lives could have been saved. The idiot Cho would have had no one to shoot at? Hopefully, he would have chewed on the gun at that point and saved us all a hassle. I would need a slightly higher payment for the unnecessary death of a loved one.
Careful BlueMax when asking important questions like yours without showing compassion. Don’t investigate the claims just pay them off as the people on this site will tell you. As for AZInsMan – it’s all about should’ve, would’ve, could’ve with respect to this loss. No one knows for sure. I’d rather take the $100K than wait for years of Court/trials, possible appeals and atty fees.
Out-of-pocket expenses “might” be compensable, but no general (pain and suffering) damages should be paid to surviors. Again I ask the question, why should anyone, other than an injured/live party, receive money for an accident or in this case, tragedy? What is that money going to do for the survior(s)? In truth, it’s part of the ******** theory developed by personal injury lawyers and sold to the un-educated public. They sold them on the “you deserve compensation” theory so they could earn their fees. Neither society nor the university has a duty to protect against nut-cases like the idiot at Virginia Tech. It’s too bad somebody made the decision to wast $11M for fear of utilizing a badly flawed legal system that thinks everybody deserves a payment regardless of liability.
I completely agree with you, it was a terrible tragedy, but how does $100,000 help the family left behind deal with the loss? In my opinion, it makes the families look greedy and as if they are wanting to profit from the death of their loved one. It should have all went to any survivors that needed it for medical care.
Why are the figures being given in dollars and in Euros?
Because this e-mail is also read in European countries.
Could we have some more information on why the parties who will not be able to be sued should have been able to be successfully sued in the first place. Apparently it makes a huge financial difference where and how we leave this earth. Please do not interpret this as a callous attitude towards those who died. I all boils down to individual responsibility. As for the lawyers I don’t think any one lawyer should get more than the lowest payment to the deceased individuals” survivors. Is anybody responsible for themselves anymore?
Because the Euro is now the world’s preferred currency…thank you, Mr. Bush…
I have a hard time believing these people will accept $100,000 for a lost child/relative when if campus police had cleared the school grounds after the first two shots/shootings, many if not all of the lives could have been saved. The idiot Cho would have had no one to shoot at? Hopefully, he would have chewed on the gun at that point and saved us all a hassle. I would need a slightly higher payment for the unnecessary death of a loved one.
Careful BlueMax when asking important questions like yours without showing compassion. Don’t investigate the claims just pay them off as the people on this site will tell you. As for AZInsMan – it’s all about should’ve, would’ve, could’ve with respect to this loss. No one knows for sure. I’d rather take the $100K than wait for years of Court/trials, possible appeals and atty fees.
Out-of-pocket expenses “might” be compensable, but no general (pain and suffering) damages should be paid to surviors. Again I ask the question, why should anyone, other than an injured/live party, receive money for an accident or in this case, tragedy? What is that money going to do for the survior(s)? In truth, it’s part of the ******** theory developed by personal injury lawyers and sold to the un-educated public. They sold them on the “you deserve compensation” theory so they could earn their fees. Neither society nor the university has a duty to protect against nut-cases like the idiot at Virginia Tech. It’s too bad somebody made the decision to wast $11M for fear of utilizing a badly flawed legal system that thinks everybody deserves a payment regardless of liability.
I completely agree with you, it was a terrible tragedy, but how does $100,000 help the family left behind deal with the loss? In my opinion, it makes the families look greedy and as if they are wanting to profit from the death of their loved one. It should have all went to any survivors that needed it for medical care.