FORD MUSTANG V8 WILL PAY DIVIDENDS NOW THAT RIVALS ARE GONE

[akirby]

8 hours ago, tbone said:

What would the basis of this lawsuit be?  

Legal basis?  None whatsoever.  But that doesn’t stop greedy, lazy people from trying and sometimes stupid juries agree with them, like the guy who was driving an Explorer drunk without seatbelts, drove off the road and flipped it and was thrown out and killed.  Lawsuit said if Ford had installed laminated side glass he wouldn’t have been thrown out - and they won millions of dollars.

 

You can’t make up stuff like that.

[Rick73]

2 hours ago, akirby said:

Legal basis?  None whatsoever.

You cite an obvious abuse of the legal system, but can you see or imagine the flip side at all?  A similar occurrence last week had an NFL football player racing a Lamborghini at very high speeds through Dallas, causing a wreck that left some innocent people injured.  Fortunately no one was killed as far as I know.  Question I have is whether Rashee Rice is 100% guilty/responsible, or did others also contribute?

 

The conservative in me says he must be only one held responsible for the greater good of society, but my common sense questions whether this is like idiot parents giving a loaded gun to their disturbed child who then kills innocent school children.  Not an exact parallel, but I think you see my point.

 

Playing Devil’s Advocate, when a manufacturer designs and builds a 1,000 HP car, they can claim drivers should only race them on a track, right?  Kind of telling your sick kid to only use gun at shooting range.  Does that free them of consequences?  In my layman’s opinion, an attorney could argue that practically all Lamborghini will be raced illegally on the streets, and manufacturer should know better than design such a menace.  Attorneys for Lamborghini would then argue that essentially all cars are driven illegally at some point.  Most things are not black and white, but some shades of grey are close enough  to draw the line.

[DeluxeStang]

18 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

Playing Devil’s Advocate, when a manufacturer designs and builds a 1,000 HP car, they can claim drivers should only race them on a track, right?  Kind of telling your sick kid to only use gun at shooting range.  Does that free them of consequences?  In my layman’s opinion, an attorney could argue that practically all Lamborghini will be raced illegally on the streets, and manufacturer should know better than design such a menace.  Attorneys for Lamborghini would then argue that essentially all cars are driven illegally at some point.  Most things are not black and white, but some shades of grey are close enough  to draw the line.

No, car brands aren't at fault for other's reckless driving. If a judge decided to deem that they were partially at fault, that would set a very dangerous legal precedent. Because any car can speed, and be driven recklessly. Ford advertises their trucks as being rugged and durable, that doesn't justify me using my maverick to ram other drivers off the road. 

 

A brand can advise someone one how to use something properly, but they can't force owners to follow those guidelines. Holding brands response for street racing would be like holding a parent responsible for their child burning their hand on a hot stove when the parents kept saying not to touch it. 

[akirby]

40 minutes ago, Rick73 said:

You cite an obvious abuse of the legal system, but can you see or imagine the flip side at all?  A similar occurrence last week had an NFL football player racing a Lamborghini at very high speeds through Dallas, causing a wreck that left some innocent people injured.  Fortunately no one was killed as far as I know.  Question I have is whether Rashee Rice is 100% guilty/responsible, or did others also contribute?

 

The conservative in me says he must be only one held responsible for the greater good of society, but my common sense questions whether this is like idiot parents giving a loaded gun to their disturbed child who then kills innocent school children.  Not an exact parallel, but I think you see my point.

 

Playing Devil’s Advocate, when a manufacturer designs and builds a 1,000 HP car, they can claim drivers should only race them on a track, right?  Kind of telling your sick kid to only use gun at shooting range.  Does that free them of consequences?  In my layman’s opinion, an attorney could argue that practically all Lamborghini will be raced illegally on the streets, and manufacturer should know better than design such a menace.  Attorneys for Lamborghini would then argue that essentially all cars are driven illegally at some point.  Most things are not black and white, but some shades of grey are close enough  to draw the line.

The law covers this already.  It’s called negligence.   Giving a minor 16 yr old new driver a powerful car could absolutely be considered negligence the same as giving them access to a gun without proper training and supervision.  But a 21 yr old is an adult in every consideration and is 100% responsible for their decisions and actions not the people who legally sell them something.

 

I believe people should be held personally accountable for their actions.  Period.  If you’re participating in an illegal activity then you’re also responsible for whatever happens whether it’s street racing or a robbery gone bad.  If you’re negligent with a minor you’re responsible.  But selling legal products to adults is where I draw the line.  What someone does with a Lamborghini is their responsibility.  And while I don’t want to turn this into a political discussion - I feel the same way about guns.  

[Rick73]

5 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

Because any car can speed, and be driven recklessly.

That’s what I said, right?  However, I honestly think society is changing its views on personal responsibility (NOT THAT I LIKE IT OR AGREE WITH IT — PLESE KEEP THIS PART STRAIGHT).  I can see two sides of an argument while only agreeing with one. 😆 

 

It’s the same reasoning used for some weapons being legal.  If some were made illegal, how about knives that can also kill, or hammers, 2X4s, etc.?  I agree the act of murder should be illegal, not so much what weapon is used.  Having stated the obvious, as far as I know it’s illegal to own certain weapons that are deemed too dangerous to society, even if owner was responsible, law abiding, and kept it secure.  If pragmatic, we have to admit extremes exist.  It doesn’t matter what I think personally, but I’d bet there are plenty of lawyers who will argue that building any car with 1,000 HP is knowingly irresponsible.  Would some argue that a 500 HP sports car is also too dangerous?  I would guess some lawyers do, and it’s just a matter of time before it ends up in court, if it hasn’t already.

[akirby]

There are people who feel sorry for victims and want to help them even if the victim was 100% responsible for their own actions.  Like people who jaywalk at night in dark clothing and get hit by a car and killed.  Sorry that’s their fault not the driver.  Empathy should not excuse liability or supercede the law.

 

A certain group of people want to outlaw or ban certain things simply because it’s an easy solution that requires them to do absolutely nothing personally just so they can say they tried something so they can sleep better.  The problem with this approach is it never addresses the true root cause and therefore doesn’t solve the problem.
 

 A simple example would be NYC banning large soft drinks.  Does that stop people from overeating?  Did it stop them from getting five refills?  Of course not.  But somebody slept better when that law was passed thinking they were improving people’s health.

 

 

[Deanh]

19 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

Hope the kid & his family don't "lawyer up", and drag you and the dealership into court,,,,,,,

 

HRG

Id be found guilty of sage advice..." just take it easy......"

[Deanh]

19 minutes ago, akirby said:

There are people who feel sorry for victims and want to help them even if the victim was 100% responsible for their own actions.  Like people who jaywalk at night in dark clothing and get hit by a car and killed.  Sorry that’s their fault not the driver.  Empathy should not excuse liability or supercede the law.

 

A certain group of people want to outlaw or ban certain things simply because it’s an easy solution that requires them to do absolutely nothing personally just so they can say they tried something so they can sleep better.  The problem with this approach is it never addresses the true root cause and therefore doesn’t solve the problem.
 

 A simple example would be NYC banning large soft drinks.  Does that stop people from overeating?  Did it stop them from getting five refills?  Of course not.  But somebody slept better when that law was passed thinking they were improving people’s health.

 

 

how about banning of Plastic straws...now you get a cardboard straw...WRAPPED in plastic.....??????????????

Edited April 9 by Deanh

[Deanh]

4 minutes ago, Deanh said:

Id be found guilty of sage advice..." just take it easy......"

 

[Deanh]

4 minutes ago, Deanh said:

ooops

 

Edited April 9 by Deanh

[ice-capades]

I can see it now. The legislatures will set forth a training process that dealerships must conduct, with the vehicle buyer prior to delivery, regarding the safe and legal operation of the vehicle. At the time of delivery, the buyer must sign an agreement disclosing that they were provided with the mandated training, in order to protect the dealership from potential litigation. It'll just be more paperwork to be signed at delivery. In CT, a customer signs more paperwork to purchase or lease a vehicle than that for a real estate transaction.  

[SoonerLS]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

There are people who feel sorry for victims and want to help them even if the victim was 100% responsible for their own actions.  Like people who jaywalk at night in dark clothing and get hit by a car and killed.  Sorry that’s their fault not the driver.  Empathy should not excuse liability or supercede the law.

 

A certain group of people want to outlaw or ban certain things simply because it’s an easy solution that requires them to do absolutely nothing personally just so they can say they tried something so they can sleep better.  The problem with this approach is it never addresses the true root cause and therefore doesn’t solve the problem.
 

 A simple example would be NYC banning large soft drinks.  Does that stop people from overeating?  Did it stop them from getting five refills?  Of course not.  But somebody slept better when that law was passed thinking they were improving people’s health.

 

 

What’s that old saying? “Never confuse motion with progress.”

[akirby]

2 hours ago, ice-capades said:

I can see it now. The legislatures will set forth a training process that dealerships must conduct, with the vehicle buyer prior to delivery, regarding the safe and legal operation of the vehicle. At the time of delivery, the buyer must sign an agreement disclosing that they were provided with the mandated training, in order to protect the dealership from potential litigation. It'll just be more paperwork to be signed at delivery. In CT, a customer signs more paperwork to purchase or lease a vehicle than that for a real estate transaction.  

Don’t give California any ideas….

[Deanh]

32 minutes ago, akirby said:

Don’t give California any ideas….

ok..heres one...we are now required to get a form signed either opting in or out getting their Catalysts etched with an identification number...Not kidding...now apparently Dealerships are an arm of Insurance agencies...I do wonder what happens if someones etched Cat gets stolen...what then, theDealership has to employ and investigation commitee???? California 101, the ONLY state that wiull tax you if you leave....

[HotRunrGuy]

22 minutes ago, Deanh said:

California 101, the ONLY state that will tax you if you leave....

 

My son, that lives in Germany, is considering revoking his US Citizenship to become a German citizen (at the moment, Germany does not allow dual-citizenship), the US Government charges $2350 to do so,,,,,

 

HRG

[tbone]

8 hours ago, HotRunrGuy said:

 

My son, that lives in Germany, is considering revoking his US Citizenship to become a German citizen (at the moment, Germany does not allow dual-citizenship), the US Government charges $2350 to do so,,,,,

 

HRG

Should we ask why he would want to do that?

[tbone]

it all boils down to half the population not wanting to take personal responsibility for their actions. It’s always somebody else’s fault but their own, so somebody has to pay. 
 

Kind of like the recent hit and runs of my truck and the Explorer on separate occasions.  So guess who’s paying for it now, and a hint is that it was not the dirty MF’s that did it.     

[akirby]

6 hours ago, tbone said:

it all boils down to half the population not wanting to take personal responsibility for their actions.    

That pretty much nails it.

[GearheadGrrrl]

Also younger drivers who never really learned how to drive... We old folks had to learn skid control, etc. because the old cars didn't do that for us. AWD/4WD hasn't helped either- spinning one or two drive wheels was a warning that the road is slippery and we slowed down, todays cars give no warning until you exceed the limits of traction and totally lose control.

[akirby]

33 minutes ago, GearheadGrrrl said:

Also younger drivers who never really learned how to drive... We old folks had to learn skid control, etc. because the old cars didn't do that for us. AWD/4WD hasn't helped either- spinning one or two drive wheels was a warning that the road is slippery and we slowed down, todays cars give no warning until you exceed the limits of traction and totally lose control.

Driver education is a joke.  We need driver training.  People don’t even know how to make a proper 90 degree turn at intersections.  
 

One local lady the other day actually said if you’re at an intersection and you have a green left turn arrow that does not mean you have the right of way.   Umm that is EXACTLY what it means.  No wonder we have so many crashes.

[ice-capades]

There was a time years ago, late 1980's I believe, that I was able to attend a Ford Performance training course that was held at the Meadowlands complex in New Jersey. It was a half-day, hands-on course conducted by Bob Bondurant and his team with most of the training being one on one with a Bondurant instructor. The cars used were Mustang GT's and Thunderbird Turbo Coupes as part of the course involved anti-lock braking. The Mustang's didn't offer ABS at the time but was standard on the Thunderbird Turbo Coupes. All cars were automatics, tuned identically and driven in 1st gear to simulate a higher driving speed.

 

For the ABS portion, the cars were driven at speed onto a simulated skid pad which was a long, large heavy duty vinyl tarp bolted to the pavement and flooded with soapy water to simulate a slippery surface. You'd drive the Turbo Coupe onto the skid pad, hit the brakes hard and stop the car before reaching the end of the skid pad. You'd do the same with the Mustang GT, without ABS, and learn how to control the car and also stop before reaching the end of the skid pad. 

 

Other parts of the course included throttle steering, slalom course and other related driving techniques. I was in an Aerostar with Bob Bondurant driving a slalom course where he started off slow and kept increasing speed until he got to the point at maximum speed, getting a wheel off the pavement, and never hitting a cone. 

 

It was a fun day and very educational.  

[DeluxeStang]

3 hours ago, akirby said:

That pretty much nails it.

Politically, I think it's both sides. I've found that, especially the hardcore people on both ends just want to blame all their issues on the other side. Case in point, I can't even talk to my grandparents without them thinking everyone who's ever supported Republicans are evil. 

[DeluxeStang]

1 hour ago, akirby said:

Driver education is a joke.  We need driver training.  People don’t even know how to make a proper 90 degree turn at intersections.  
 

One local lady the other day actually said if you’re at an intersection and you have a green left turn arrow that does not mean you have the right of way.   Umm that is EXACTLY what it means.  No wonder we have so many crashes.

I remember my driving instructor telling me I was too cautious when driving because I slowed down when making a right turn on a red. I would gradually come to a stop, check to see if anyone was coming, and then go. He told me you shouldn't come to a stop when doing that because "The drivers behind you won't expect you to and might hit you". I couldn't believe what I was hearing. 

[ice-capades]

4 minutes ago, DeluxeStang said:

I remember my driving instructor telling me I was too cautious when driving because I slowed down when making a right turn on a red. I would gradually come to a stop, check to see if anyone was coming, and then go. He told me you shouldn't come to a stop when doing that because "The drivers behind you won't expect you to and might hit you". I couldn't believe what I was hearing. 

 

And as far as I know, the "Right Turn on Red" laws are after a stop, not just to slow down and continue. Defensive driving these days means just that. You can't trust other drivers to do what they've indicated. I never pull out because an oncoming car indicates with their turn signals that they're actually going to turn! And never just relying on traffic lights to move because of the large volume of drivers that run the lights. And seeing how many drivers are talking on their cell phones, as they're running red lights, because their conversations are more important. And in the majority of cases, they're not even aware that they were responsible for almost causing a serious accident.    

[akirby]

1 hour ago, DeluxeStang said:

Politically, I think it's both sides. I've found that, especially the hardcore people on both ends just want to blame all their issues on the other side. Case in point, I can't even talk to my grandparents without them thinking everyone who's ever supported Republicans are evil. 

Slightly different issue but you’re completely correct.  Everything is black and white and their side is good and the other side is evil.  Doesn’t matter the issue.  I blame social media echo chambers.