Dumb question.

[Baller23Boogie]

The No belt with a suit is something I can’t do

The only time I don't have a belt on is when I'm wearing athletic joggers or sweats.

 

[T.M.P.]

The string belt

gay

 

[outside shooter]

What percentage of the apparel in all of those fashion photos was made in the USA, of USA sourced materials?

My best guess would be in the range of 0-5%

 

[NPT]

In my entire life I’ve had one bad neighbor. Neighbor across the street. Two big labs. Let their dogs out early in the am and would watch them run to our front yard and shit. I told them repeatedly to stop.

One day my daughter. Probably two slid in a big pile of it in the front yard. I walked over and knocked on the door with it in a bag. Then when they opened the door I went to their big front window and smeared it all over the window. Then I went to the next window and did it again

 

[Eppy99]

Seems like this thread needs to be merged with my skin care thread.

 

[NPT]

If not, I don’t see why the bar should be liable. Makes no logical sense at all - except for the bar having more insurance money for the greaseball to put in his pocket.

Maybe they should screen their bouncers a little better. You and I both know that if you give a lot of people a little power it goes to their head and they go overboard. Look at the Rodney King case.... how many officers were around him...5 to 10 if I remember correctly. I'd be ashamed as an officer if 5 of them couldn't arrest a guy without beating him up.

 

[BradStevens]

Maybe they should screen their bouncers a little better. You and I both know that if you give a lot of people a little power it goes to their head and they go overboard. Look at the Rodney King case.... how many officers were around him...5 to 10 if I remember correctly. I'd be ashamed as an officer if 5 of them couldn't arrest a guy without beating him up.

Juror #5, you're selected.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Maybe they should screen their bouncers a little better. You and I both know that if you give a lot of people a little power it goes to their head and they go overboard. Look at the Rodney King case.... how many officers were around him...5 to 10 if I remember correctly. I'd be ashamed as an officer if 5 of them couldn't arrest a guy without beating him up.

If it turns out that these bouncers were known to be raging violent roidheads, I'd have some sympathy for this argument.

Failing that, how exactly is screening bouncers -- or any other employee -- supposed to preclude one of them doing something like this...or committing some other kind of tort while at work? What kind of screening would accomplish this, anyway? Intensive multimodal psychoanalysis?

If some guy comes into our office and our receptionist flies off the handle and whacks him across the head with a toner cartridge, you think the company should be held liable?

 

[BradStevens]

If it turns out that these bouncers were known to be raging violent roidheads, I'd have some sympathy for this argument.

Failing that, how exactly is screening bouncers -- or any other employee -- supposed to preclude one of them doing something like this...or committing some other kind of tort while at work? What kind of screening would accomplish this, anyway? Intensive multimodal psychoanalysis?

If some guy comes into our office and our receptionist flies off the handle and whacks him across the head with a toner cartridge, you think the company should be held liable?

Judge, we're going to use a peremptory strike on Juror #2. Thanks.

No, no, #2. That's enough. No more talking. Thanks for your service. Don't forget your $10.45 check at the Clerk's Office.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Maybe they should screen their bouncers a little better. You and I both know that if you give a lot of people a little power it goes to their head and they go overboard. Look at the Rodney King case.... how many officers were around him...5 to 10 if I remember correctly. I'd be ashamed as an officer if 5 of them couldn't arrest a guy without beating him up.

Also, re the Rodney King deal, I thought it was a travesty of justice that those cops were acquitted. And, while I certainly get what you're saying about power trips, it doesn't exactly speak to how the liability for the bouncers' actions transfers from them to their employer.

I'm not saying it's impossible that something that actually comports with common sense might exist to do that. Maybe at their orientation, the owner or manager explained that Company policy was to beat the shit out of anybody who mouths off to bartenders. In that case, I'm with you.

But it would have to be something like that.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Also, re the Rodney King deal, I thought it was a travesty of justice that those cops were acquitted. And, while I certainly get what you're saying about power trips, it doesn't exactly speak to how the liability for the bouncers' actions transfers from them to their employer.

I'm not saying it's impossible that something that actually comports with common sense might exist to do that. Maybe at their orientation, the owner or manager explained that Company policy was to beat the shit out of anybody who mouths off to bartenders. In that case, I'm with you.

But it would have to be something like that.

City/employer pays for negligent cops. Most are self funded with insurance kicking in at a certain level

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

Judge, we're going to use a peremptory strike on Juror #2. Thanks.

No, no, #2. That's enough. No more talking. Thanks for your service. Don't forget your $10.45 check at the Clerk's Office.

Heh. Reminds me of a story.

I sat on an industry fund committee and our fund counsel was a well-known lawyer around here who was a jack-of-all-trades. He was about the only union-side labor lawyer around here worth a crap. But he also did personal injury stuff and had over his career moonlighted (at different times, of course) both as a part-time deputy prosecutor and a public defender.

Anyway, there was a high profile incident about 12ish years ago where some drug hoods came out in the sticks and robbed this redneck's house at gunpoint. When they left, he got in his truck, chased them down, and eventually rammed into them...one of the hoods was killed.

The prosecution was initially assigned to our fund's lawyer (it ended up with somebody else). And he was being charged with first-degree murder. I came into one of our meetings right after that news broke and told him that he better hope he didn't see me on his jury pool. Of course, he went into a whole spiel about how I didn't know all the facts, Castle doctrine didn't extend beyond his property, etc.

Yeah, yeah...I get all that. I'm just saying I'm not likely to convict him of 1st degree murder.

He stayed in jail for a number of months. As I recall, he ended up pleading to criminal recklessness and got time already served.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

City/employer pays for negligent cops. Most are self funded with insurance kicking in at a certain level

That doesn't mean that makes any logical sense. A negligent cop should be held liable for his own negligence....unless there's some compelling reason why the city ought to be liable (the city having enough money to pay for insurance policies doesn't count as "compelling", in my view).

 

[The Original Happy Goat]

One thing I've figured out watching you guys discussion fashion, if I want to truly look good, I'm going to have to start doing some situps.

 

[mcmurtry66]

That doesn't mean that makes any logical sense. A negligent cop should be held liable for his own negligence....unless there's some compelling reason why the city ought to be liable (the city having enough money to pay for insurance policies doesn't count as "compelling", in my view).

You hate vicarious liability. It’s kind of central to the notion of spreading the loss in torts. To an entity with greater resources that can spread through insurance etc. essentially better for society. At least that’s the idea

 

[mcmurtry66]

One thing I've figured out watching you guys discussion fashion, if I want to truly look good, I'm going to have to start doing some situps.

Diet. Two Oreos is a triathlon

 

[T.M.P.]

One thing I've figured out watching you guys discussion fashion,

No man cares that much about clothes except the extremely superficial and/or extremely effeminate.

 

[crazed_hoosier2]

You hate vicarious liability. It’s kind of central to the notion of spreading the loss in torts. To an entity with greater resources that can spread through insurance etc. essentially better for society. At least that’s the idea

Why should a loss be spread to anybody who played no role in causing it? And what does them having greater resources have to do with making that right and just?

So, yes, I do hate what you're describing.

I'm absolutely fine with the concept of insurance, pooling risk, etc. More than fine with it. But that's not the same thing as transferring liability from somebody who's actually responsible for damages to somebody else, just because they have insurance or more money.

 

[mcmurtry66]

Why should a loss be spread to anybody who played no role in causing it? And what does them having greater resources have to do with making that right and just?

So, yes, I do hate what you're describing.

I'm absolutely fine with the concept of insurance, pooling risk, etc. More than fine with it. But that's not the same thing as transferring liability from somebody who's actually responsible for damages to somebody else, just because they have insurance or more money.

I agree re intentional torts. Accidents the idea is tantamount to social welfare by not putting all of the loss on one. Spread it to a larger group so it doesn’t destroy one person. In this way we’re all insulated from ruin

 

[BradStevens]

Why should a loss be spread to anybody who played no role in causing it? And what does them having greater resources have to do with making that right and just?

So, yes, I do hate what you're describing.

I'm absolutely fine with the concept of insurance, pooling risk, etc. More than fine with it. But that's not the same thing as transferring liability from somebody who's actually responsible for damages to somebody else, just because they have insurance or more money.

• • The doctrine of vicarious liability emerged in the late 17th and early 18th centuries, coinciding with the rapid expansion of industry and commerce.
    
    
  • Lord Holt (Sir John Holt CJ) is considered a pioneer in this area, with his 1698 statement in Jones v. Hart ("For whoever employs another, is answerable for him, and undertakes for his care to all that make use of him") being a foundational statement.
    
    
  • He also declared in Herne v Nicholl (1700) that "For seeing somebody must be a loser, it is more reason, that he that employs and puts a trust and confidence… should be a loser rather than a stranger".
    
    

 

[NPT]

If it turns out that these bouncers were known to be raging violent roidheads, I'd have some sympathy for this argument.

Failing that, how exactly is screening bouncers -- or any other employee -- supposed to preclude one of them doing something like this...or committing some other kind of tort while at work? What kind of screening would accomplish this, anyway? Intensive multimodal psychoanalysis?

If some guy comes into our office and our receptionist flies off the handle and whacks him across the head with a toner cartridge, you think the company should be held liable?

Well I'll agree that no owner should be responsible for every action an employee does. However, I think they should have to show that they had a process in place to try to weed out the bad apples.

 

[All4You]

My relatives always had them. My ex wife rescues. Me English bulldogs. My ex stoker Poms. Hard to win the love and trust of a pom. But if you do. It’s more protection than a thousand armies could ever provide.

I want one big dog before I croak. When my minion gets a little older I’m going to get a big dog. Mastiff or something

Bro...you ever clean up after a big dog? Sister had a breeding pair of Great Danes when I was a lad and let me tell you, there's no pooper scooper able to handle that. You need an iron constitution and a snow shovel. Seriously, you had to shovel it out of the back yard before mowing and if you missed a pile and mowed over it, it would stall the motor.

 

[Baller23Boogie]

Bro...you ever clean up after a big dog? Sister had a breeding pair of Great Danes when I was a lad and let me tell you, there's no pooper scooper able to handle that. You need an iron constitution and a snow shovel. Seriously, you had to shovel it out of the back yard before mowing and if you missed a pile and mowed over it, it would stall the motor.

Uncle a few years ago had 3 bull mastiff. Two males and a female. Two have passed, unfortunately.

I'm 6'3 and each one of them, if they stood on their back legs were taller then me.

Sweetest dogs ever, but if you weren't suppose to be there, they let you know. Very good security system.