Gloom

Jose wrote:
How would you protect the innocent against valid claims? Or do you
aver that no claims are valid?
Loser pays.

Attractive on the surface, but that means deeper pockets can take the
risk much more easily than shallow pockets. Then, the mere =threat=
of a lawsuit has a dampening effect proportional to the pockets
making the thread, and inversely proportional to the pockets
receiving it.
That's a serious flaw.

Jose

Sorry but the legal system should be able to be used as a get rich quick
program. Actually there is a much better program that I would propose but
there is no way in hell it would ever get passed.

In my plan there would be the outcomes of any civil litigation.

Plaintiff wins
Plaintiff loses
Plaintiff's lawyer pays all costs because this suit is so without merit that
it is stupid. After any lawyer gets three of these they are dis-barred.

There is a judge in DC that is suing for $54Mil because a dry cleaner lost
his pants. That's right a judge. This case actually made it to court without
being thrown out. If you can look at that case and not say that tort reform
is needed then you live in a different world than I do.

http://www.pointoflaw.com/archives/004005.php

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

Sorry but the legal system should be able to be used as a get rich
quick program.

Obviously, I should have written SHOULDN'T in the above.

On 2007-06-18 12:35:27 -0400, "Gig 601XL Builder"
wrDOTgiaconaATsuddenlink.net said:

Gig 601XL Builder wrote:

Sorry but the legal system should be able to be used as a get rich
quick program.

Obviously, I should have written SHOULDN'T in the above.

Thank GOD! For a minute there I thought you were a lawyer.
:-))))
Dudley Henriques

On Jun 18, 10:09 am, Larry Dighera wrote:
As long as the government continues to subsidize profiteering oil
companies, and fails to impose a windfall profits tax and/or price
controls as was done in the '70s, the cost of living will increase in
proportion to the obscene oilmens' profits. And don't forget, that
our government is letting our currency, the US dollar, continue its
plunge in value, thus further reducing the purchasing power of US
workers. So while baby Bush and the sheiks hug and kiss, the American
populace loses ground on the financial front, and Halliburton moves to
Dubai to escape taxation on their non-competitive government contract
profits.


Oh great. Price controls. So now I won't be able to buy avgas at ANY
price. My bird has short enough legs without having to ferry gas too.

bdl
9093K

"Jose" wrote in message
et...

3B3 makes all the other airports more valuable, just as they make 3B3
valuable. (imagine how useless 3B3 would be if there were no other
airports)

Lots of gliders at 3B3. Most don't land anywhere else.

On Jun 17, 8:06 pm, Jay Honeck wrote:
Mary and I just returned from a wonderful weekend at the Cherokee
Pilots Association national fly-in, held annually in Osage Beach,
Missouri, at the Tan-Tar-A resort. We had a wonderful time, catching
up with old friends, and making new ones. We bought some cool stuff
from the vendors, gave away some hotel certificates to CPA members,
and I enjoyed a marvelous Father's Day flight home.

Appreciate the report Jay. I had intended to go to last year's
shindig, but by the time I got around to doing anything about it there
wasn't any more room at Tan-Tar-A for the fly-in (I don't remember the
details, but basically what I do remember, was that I was "too late"
and was kicking myself).

This year, I didn't hear about it until I happened by one of your
posts, and then realized that it was father's day weekend. It wasn't
always on father's day weekend was it? I certainly don't remember
that from previous years. For some reason I thought it was later in
June. Combine that with the fact that I have a pre-planned family get
away at the the Lake of the Ozark's the following weekend and it just
didn't "fit" for me this year.

To further your gloom, it was also the WACO fly-in at 1H0 this
weekend. And while there were plenty of airplanes on the ramp, it was
not up to previous years. I haven't gotten the details from the
regulars on the field yet as to if the overall numbers were up/down,
but I suspect they were down.

While fuel costs have certainly curtailed some flying, I find my
biggest issue with planning a long cross country is the local
attractions/transportation. I've gone to Tan-Tar-A for a weekend trip
before with the wife and kid and we had a blast, but we were basically
locked into the resort. A one day car rental was over $80 (before
taxes) from the front desk, and $50-60 at the FBO. That quickly
destroy's the value proposition versus driving 3 hours.

Basically I "need" someone at the remote destination, or it has to be
a major city with decent car rentals (and no exhorbitant FBO
surcharges!) in which case I likely have to pay an exhorbitant price
for fuel.

As to OSH, I'll be there this year, (and hope to make it to the R.A.P
party for the first time), but it looks like I'm driving as my other
partners are getting their chance to fly the trip this year.

Brian

Sorry but the legal system should [not] be able to
be used as a get rich quick program.

I agree (as corrected). But I am not proposing that it should, nor am I
proposing that the present system is not flawed.

Plaintiff wins
Plaintiff loses
Plaintiff's lawyer pays all costs because this suit is so without merit that
it is stupid. After any lawyer gets three of these they are dis-barred.

This has some merit, but I would add

4: Defendent's lawyer pays all costs because their defense tactics are
so without merit that it is stupid and is only used to make it difficult
to bring legitimate suits against big corporations. Microsoft comes to
mind, as does Sony. (google "Sony Rootkit")

There is a judge in DC that is suing for $54Mil...

So? The problem isn't in the ability to bring suit, but in whether or
not it's taken seriously upon investigation.

This case actually made it to court without
being thrown out.

Were the clothes damaged? That is a legitimate tort. Only after the
facts are determined are the damages decided. In general, they cannot
be more than requested, but can be less. (Maybe this should be
reconsidered)

Was he =awarded= anything ridiculous?

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Lots of gliders at 3B3. Most don't land anywhere else.

No matter, its existance makes the other airports valuable anyway. Not
many people drive on some roads, but the other roads still connect to them.

And if 3B3 didn't exist, those gliders would be elsewhere, or would not
fly. That's something too.'

Jose
--
You can choose whom to befriend, but you cannot choose whom to love.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

("Gig 601XL Builder" wrote)
After any lawyer gets three of these they are dis-barred.


The American Bar Association is for the lawyers.

The Public Legal Pannel needs to be for us citizens.

Here's how it works: A jury rules on what cases go to court.

Five people are appointed ...(per county, state, whatever)
Five people are picked .........(like a jury pool)
One person is randomly chosen as alternate, each day.

Some basic training would be required - 2 nights per week/ 10 weeks

Six month term, after training.

They hear requests to go to court Mon-Wed-Sat(!)
(8am-10am) and (7pm-9pm)

Tue-Thur (same times) are for deliberations.

6-3 vote, your case moves forward.

You get up to 10 request (per case) to be ruled (voted) on. This goes
through, this does not, this is ok, this is outrageous, etc.

There, it's like putting the Supreme Court at the beginning of the process.


Paul-Mont

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 13:04:15 GMT, Kevin Clarke
wrote:

AJ wrote:
We must make the general public know that the little airport in town
is necessary to them (not to us -- we know how important it is), and
how becoming a pilot can be within their reach. If we define
ourselves as necessary, and not just an old folks' vanity group, we
will have allies to help fight to lower or eliminate user fees, bring
the overall cost of general aviation down, and swell our ranks with
people who still have their prostate.



I love to fly. I love the fact that I have achieved something that was a
lifelong dream of mine. I started at 40 yrs old. Now I'm 43. I'm as
passionate about this as anybody however...

I do not get this argument. I would like to understand it. But why is
the little podunk airport important? 3B3 Sterling, Mass, offers very
little to the local economy, if anything. KFIT, my home base, offers
very little to the local economy, a couple of shops, a restaurant, a few
commercial flights (Part 135) per week. Are they that big a deal? KORH
is vastly underutilized, it is 30 minutes away by car. So seriously, I
do not understand the argument about saving every airport.

The direct impact of the aviation economy (mechanic jobs, pilot shops,
restaurants on field) is important, but not nearly as important as the
role aviation plays in the national transportation infrastructure.

We (as taxpayers) fund the development of Interstates, highways, and
rural roads. Any individual road is not that important, but connected
together - they allow efficient transport of goods and services
throughout our country.

Airports need to be viewed in the same manner. Any single airport
does not matter that much, but when viewed in aggregate, the entire
system is invaluable to our ability to quickly deliver goods/services
throughout the country.

-Nathan